UNIVERSITY  O 
ILLINOiS  JBRARY 
"I  URBANA-CHAMPAIGN 
AGRICULTURE 


The  person  charging  this  material  is  re¬ 
sponsible  for  its  return  to  the  library  from 
which  it  was  withdrawn  on  or  before  the 
Latest  Date  stamped  below. 


Theft,  mutilation,  and  underlining  of  books  are  reasons 
for  disciplinary  action  and  may  result  in  dismissal  from 

the  University.  —  - _ ^ 

To  renew  call  Telephone  Cent^fT333-84QO^ 

UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS  LIBRARY  AT  URBANA-CHAMPAIGN 


JUL3  o 


FEB  1  8  2)02. 


1  "\ 

\) 


MAY  01  20  33 
JAN  1  1  2(04 

m  2  2  2(  06 


986 


L161— 0-1096 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2019  with  funding  from 
University  of  Illinois  Urbana-Champaign 


https://archive.org/details/historyofagriculOObidw 


History  of  Agriculture  in  the 

Northern  United  States 

1620-1860 


BY 

Percy  Wells  Bidwell,  Ph.  D. 

ECONOMIST,  UNITED  STATES  TARIFF  COMMISSION 

FORMERLY 

ASSISTANT  PROFESSOR  OF  ECONOMICS,  YALE  UNIVERSITY 

AND 

John  I.  Falconer,  Ph.  D. 

PROFESSOR  OF  RURAL  ECONOMY,  OHIO  STATE  UNIVERSITY 


Published  by  the  Carnegie  Institution  of  Washington 

Washington,  May,  1925 


UNIVERSITY  of 
ILLINOIS  LIBRARY 

M  URBANA-CHAMPAIGN 

agriculture 


History  of  Agriculture  in  the 
Northern  United  States 


162ft#  8. 


ercy  Wells  Bidwell,  Ph.  D. 

ECONOMIST,  UNITED  STATES  TARIFF  COMMISSION 

FORMERLY 

ASSISTANT  PROFESSOR  OF  ECONOMICS,  YALE  UNIVERSITY 

AND 


John  I.  Falconer,  Ph.  D. 

PROFESSOR  OF  RURAL  ECONOMY,  OHIO  STATE  UNIVERSITY 


Published  by  the  Carnegie  Institution  of  Washington 

Washington,  May,  1925 


CARNEGIE  INSTITUTION  OF  WASHINGTON 

Publication  No.  358 


JSorb  Qj^afftmor*  (pteee 

BALTIMORE,  MD.,  U.  S.  A. 


UWWEHSITY  OF  (JLJJfitfT 
K»RICULTU.\E  l'IC.v-„\Y 


j 


6>10,<j73 

B  ^7-Ji 

CAf>,  7 


/y 


CONTRIBUTIONS  TO  AMERICAN  ECONOMIC  HISTORY 


BOARD  OF  RESEARCH  ASSOCIATES 
IN  AMERICAN  ECONOMIC  HISTORY 


Henry  W.  Farnam,  Chairman 


Victor  S.  Clark 
John  R.  Commons 
Davis  R.  Dewey 
Henry  B.  Gardner 


Emory  R.  Johnson 
E.  W.  Parker 
Henry  C.  Taylor 
Walter  F.  Willcox 


* 


- 


*■ 


INTRODUCTORY  NOTE. 

This  volume  forms  a  part  of  the  Contributions  to  American  Economic  His¬ 
tory  projected  by  the  Department  of  Economics  and  Sociology  of  the  Car¬ 
negie  Institution  of  Washington  in  1904,  and  is  the  fifth  study  to  be  published. 
It  has  been  preceded  by  the  History  of  Domestic  and  Foreign  Commerce  by 
Professor  Johnson  and  colleagues,  1915;  the  History  of  Manufactures  from 
1607  to  i860  by  Dr.  Victor  S.  Clark,  1916;  the  History  of  Transportation  to 
i860,  prepared  under  the  direction  of  Dr.  B.  H.  Meyer,  1917;  and  the  His¬ 
tory  of  Labor  by  Professor  John  R.  Commons  and  collaborators,  1918. 

The  direction  of  the  Division  of  Agriculture  was  originally  entrusted  to 
Dr.  Kenyon  L.  Butterfield,  then  president  of  the  Rhode  Island  College  of 
Agriculture,  and  later  president  of  the  Massachusetts  Agricultural  College. 
He  prepared  a  syllabus  of  the  work,  and  arranged  with  a  number  of  scholars 
to  treat  the  topics  which  he  had  outlined,  but,  owing  to  the  many  demands  for 
public  service  made  upon  his  time,  he  was  unable  to  carry  the  plan  to  comple¬ 
tion.  A  considerable  amount  of  preparatory  work  was,  however,  done,  espe¬ 
cially  under  Dr.  Henry  C.  Taylor,  then  chairman  of  the  Department  of  Agri¬ 
cultural  Economics  of  the  University  of  Wisconsin.  He  projected  the  plan  of 
preparing  the  series  of  dot  maps  showing  the  expansion  of  American  agri¬ 
culture,  selected  much  of  the  material,  and  supervised  the  preparation  of  the 
text.  He  personally  went  through,  page  by  page,  the  volumes  of  The  Culti¬ 
vator  and  The  Country  Gentleman  from  1840  to  1865  and  extracted  such 
excerpts  as  contributed  toward  the  story  as  presented  in  this  volume.  During 
the  same  time,  J.  L.  Coulter  and  A.  E.  Cance,  who  were  then  graduate  stu¬ 
dents  in  the  University  of  Wisconsin,  gave  considerable  time  to  this  task  and 
gathered  from  various  sources  much  material  which  was  subsequently  used. 
O.  E.  Baker  and  O.  C.  Stine  also  contributed  in  various  ways  to  the  collection 
of  material  for  this  part  of  the  volume.  Owing  to  the  many  delays  caused  by 
other  tasks,  special  arrangements  were  made  in  the  spring  of  1913  with  J.  I. 
Falconer,  then  a  graduate  student  at  the  University  of  Wisconsin,  to  devote 
his  entire  time  to  the  gathering  of  additional  material  and  to  the  preparation 
of  the  manuscript  for  the  period  1840-1860.  In  the  present  work  Professor 
Falconer  contributes  Part  IV,  The  Period  of  Transformation  (pages  259- 
453).  Professor  Taylor  also  secured  the  preparation  of  an  exhaustive  study 
of  the  southern  plantation  down  to  i860  by  Dr.  L.  C.  Gray. 

Upon  the  discontinuance  of  the  Department  of  Economics  and  Sociology 
in  1916,  and  the  reorganization  of  those  who  had  been  collaborating  in  its  work 
as  the  Board  of  Research  Associates  in  American  Economic  History,  Profes¬ 
sor  Taylor  was  asked  to  take  charge  of  the  History  of  Agriculture  in  the  place 
of  President  Butterfield,  who  desired  to  be  relieved  on  account  of  the  pressure 
of  other  duties.  A  number  of  circumstances  soon  made  it  desirable  to  change 
the  general  plan  of  the  work.  Professor  Taylor  was  in  1919  appointed  Chief 
of  the  Office  of  Farm  Management  in  the  Department  of  Agriculture  in 
Washington,  and  subsequently  Chief  of  the  Bureau  of  Agricultural  Economics. 
This  bureau  has  been  gathering  a  large  quantity  of  material  regarding  the 
development  of  agriculture  in  the  United  States  since  i860,  and  has  much 


v 


VI 


INTRODUCTORY  NOTE 


greater  resources  for  this  kind  of  work  than  could  be  commanded  by  a  volun¬ 
teer  group.  The  material  for  the  period  prior  to  the  Civil  War  is,  however, 
not  so  voluminous.  Moreover,  in  more  ways  than  one  the  Civil  War  and  the 
abolition  of  slavery  marked,  a  turning  point  in  the  history  of  agriculture,  as 
in  the  whole  economic  life  of  the  nation.  Therefore  it  was  decided  to  limit 
the  work  of  the  Research  Associates  to  the  period  prior  to  i860,  and  to  treat 
this  period  under  the  two  natural  divisions  of  the  South  and  the  North. 

The  history  of  southern  agriculture  was  already  well  covered  in  manuscripl 
by  Dr.  Gray  in  his  History  of  the  Southern  Plantation.  He  was,  accordingly, 
asked  to  condense  and  revise  this  monograph,  while  Dr.  Percy  W.  Bidwell, 
then  Assistant  Professor  of  Economics  at  Yale,  was  invited  to  prepare  the 
History  of  Northern  Agriculture  to  1840  (Parts  I-III,  pages  1-257  the 
present  work).  Dr.  Bidwell  was  well  qualified  for  his  task  by  the  work  which 
he  had  already  done  in  the  history  of  New  England  agriculture,  and  spent  over 
a  year,  from  1922  to  1923,  in  Washington  working  upon  the  material  in  the 
Library  of  Congress  and  in  the  Department  of  Agriculture.  He  has  since 
edited  the  Falconer  manuscript  so  as  to  merge  the  two  studies  into  a  consistent 
history  with  continuous  chapter  numbers  and  has  prepared  the  bibliography. 

Although  Dr.  Bidwell  did  his  work  with  great  care,  it  was  thought  wise 
to  reduce  possible  inaccuracies  to  a  minimum  by  having  the  references  checked 
independently  by  experts  in  the  Department  of  Agriculture.  This  work  was 
done  under  the  direction  of  Mr.  Donald  Jackson  by  Miss  Esther  K.  Thompson 
in  the  Division  of  Statistical  and  Historical  Research  of  the  Bureau  of  Agri¬ 
cultural  Economics.  We  are  much  indebted  to  these  scholars  for  their 
careful  work,  as  well  as  to  Dr.  Taylor  for  undertaking  the  general  direction 
of  the  entire  study. 

Henry  W.  Farnam, 

New  Haven,  Conn.,  May,  1925. 


CONTENTS. 


PART  I.— AGRICULTURE  IN  THE  EARLIEST  SETTLEMENTS. 

PAGE 

Chapter  I. — Field  Husbandry .  5 

Dependence  on  natural  food  resources,  5.  The  first  houses,  6.  Natural  clear¬ 
ings  or  openings,  6.  Origin  of  clearings,  8.  How  the  land  was  cleared,  8. 

The  first  crops,  9.  Indian  management  of  maize,  10.  Cultivation  of  maize 
by  English  settlers,  11.  European  grains,  12.  The  wheat  blast,  13.  Rye, 
barley,  oats,  14.  Flax,  14.  Tobacco,  15.  Vegetables,  16.  Fruit,  16. 

Chapter  II. — Livestock  .  18 

Earliest  importations,  18.  The  forage  problem — native  grasses  unsatis¬ 
factory.  19.  Introduction  of  English  grasses,  20.  Management  and  care  of 
livestock,  21.  Duties  of  the  cow  herd,  22.  Opening  the  meadows — stinted 
common.  22.  Brands  and  earmarks,  23.  The  control  of  breeding,  23.  The 
neat  cattle — their  varied  ancestry,  24.  Care  of  livestock — shelter  and  winter 


feed,  25.  Relative  importance  of  various  kinds  of  stock,  26.  Dairying  and 
beef  production,  27.  Sheep,  28.  Draft  animals — horses  and  oxen,  29.  Swine, 

31.  Other  livestock,  32. 

Chapter  III. — Farm  Labor,  Equipment  and  Land .  33 

Labor  scarce  and  wages  high,  33.  Group  cooperation,  34.  Farm  equip¬ 
ment — tools  and  implements,  34.  Plows,  35.  Carts,  36.  Size  of  farms,  37. 

Land  utilization,  38. 

Chapter — IV. — Trade  in  Agricultural  Products .  40 


Imports  of  food,  40.  Purchases  of  corn  from  the  natives,  41.  Beginning 
of  regional  specialization,  41.  Trade  with  the  West  Indies,  42.  Exports  of 
grains,  provisions,  and  horses  from  New  England,  43.  Trade  of  the  middle 
colonies,  45.  The  market  for  agricultural  products  in  the  towns,  45.  Mar¬ 
kets  and  fairs,  46. 

Chapter  V. — Land  Tenure .  49 

The  land  system  of  New  England,  49.  Grants  to  individuals,  49.  Grants  to 
communities,  49.  Laying  out  the  town:  the  home  lots,  51.  Division  of  up¬ 
lands  and  meadows,  52.  The  rule  of  distribution,  52.  Relative  size  of 
allotments,  53.  Tendency  toward  concentration  of  land  holdings,  54.  The 
common  fields — proprietors’  commons,  55.  Town  commons,  55.  Commoners 
and  non-commoners,  56.  The  disadvantage  of  common  fields,  57.  The  end  of 
the  commons,  57.  Origin  of  the  New  England  village  community,  58.  Sig¬ 
nificance  of  the  New  England  land  system,  58.  The  private  law  of  real 
property  in  New  England,  58.  Land  tenure  in  the  middle  colonies,  60. 

Terms  of  distribution  of  land  in  Pennsylvania  and  New  Jersey,  60.  The 
size  of  grants,  61.  Quit  rents,  62.  Land  tenure  in  New  Netherlands  and 
New  York,  62.  Land  tenure  under  the  English  governors,  63.  Quit  rents 
in  New  York,  64.  The  methods  of  settlement  in  the  middle  colonies,  64. 

Law  of  inheritance,  66.  Summary,  66. 

PART  II.— RURAL  ECONOMY  IN  THE  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY. 

Chapter  VI. — Pioneering  in  the  Eighteenth  Century .  69 

The  westward  progress  of  settlement,  69.  The  causes  of  expansion  on  new 
land,  7c.  The  rise  of  land  values  in  the  older  communities,  70.  Land  policy 
and  emigration — New  England,  71;  in  Pennsylvania,  72;  in  New  York,  73. 

Land  policy  after  the  Revolution,  74.  Land  speculation  in  New  York,  74. 

The  wild  lands  of  Maine,  75.  Land  policy  summarized,  75.  Other  causes 
of  emigration  to  the  frontier,  76.  General  description  of  pioneer  farming, 

76.  Methods  of  clearing,  77.  Pioneer  crops  and  tillage,  78.  Livestock — hay 
and  pasturage,  79.  The  importance  of  by-industries,  potash  and  maple- 
sugar,  79.  The  progress  of  pioneer  communities — hardships  of  pioneering, 

81.  Summary — Pioneering  as  a  process  of  capital-making,  82. 

vii 


VIII 


CONTENTS 


Chapter  VII. — Farming  in  the  Older  Settlements.  Crops  and  Tillage . 

Contemporary  criticism,  84.  Crop  management,  85.  Fertilizers  and  soil 
amendments,  87.  Influence  of  the  New  York  market,  89.  Grain  crops,  89. 
Cultivation  of  maize  in  New  England — varieties,  90.  Maize  in  New  Sweden, 
92.  Wheat — shift  from  old  to  new  soils  in  New  England,  92.  Success  of 
wheat  in  the  middle  colonies,  93.  Black-stem  rust  in  New  England — legis¬ 
lation  against  barberries,  93.  Seed  selection — winter  vs.  spring  wheat,  95. 
The  Hessian  fly,  its  origin — effects  of  its  ravages,  95.  Tillage  of  wheat,  96. 
Rye,  96.  Minor  grains — barley,  oats,  buckwheat,  97.  Potatoes,  97.  Flax,  98. 
Tobacco,  98.  Peas,  99.  Garden  vegetables,  99.  Fruit,  99.  Special  crops — 
hemp  and  silk,  100.  Crop  yields,  101. 

Chapter  VIII. — Grazing  and  Livestock . 

Hay  and  pasturage,  102.  Irrigation  of  meadows,  103.  Cultivated  grasses — 
clover  and  timothy,  103.  Number  and  kinds  of  livestock  kept  on  typical 
farms,  105.  The  care  and  management  of  livestock,  107.  Neat  cattle,  107. 
Cattle  raising  and  beef  fattening,  108.  Dairying,  109.  Sheep,  no,  Swine, 
in.  Draft  animals — oxen  and  horses,  hi.  The  Narragansett  pacers,  113. 
Conestoga  horses,  113. 

Chapter  IX. — Farm  Management  and  Household  Economy . 

Economic  characteristics  of  colonial  agriculture,  115.  Size  of  farms,  115. 
Farm  labor,  116.  The  Redemptioners,  117.  Wages  of  farm  labor,  117. 
Slaves  in  New  England,  118.  Land  utilization,  119.  Farm  improvements — 
inclosures,  121.  Farm  buildings,  121.  Barns  of  German  settlers  in  Pennsyl¬ 
vania,  122.  Tools  and  implements,  123.  Plows,  123.  Harrows,  124.  Har¬ 
vesting,  threshing,  and  cleaning  grain,  125.  Self-sufficient  farming,  126. 
The  household  textile  industry,  127.  The  organization  of  the  household 
industries,  128.  Construction  and  furnishing  of  farmhouses,  129.  Pur¬ 
chases  and  sales,  129.  The  farmer  a  jack  of  all  trades,  130.  Causes  of  his 
versatility,  131. 

Chapter  X. — ; Agricultural  Trade . 

The  lack  of  a  home  market,  132.  Manufactures  not  differentiated  from 
agriculture,  132.  The  country  store,  133.  The  export  markets,  133.  Exports 
to  Europe,  134.  Exports  to  the  West  Indies,  135.  Trade  of  Philadelphia 
with  the  back  country,  138.  Trade  of  New  York  with  the  back  country,  139. 
Trade  of  New  England  ports,  140.  The  Boston  market,  141.  The  coasting 
trade,  142.  Dependence  of  New  England  on  foodstuffs  from  the  southern 
and  middle  colonies,  142. 

PART  III.— EXPANSION  AND  PROGRESS,  1800-1840. 

Chapter  XI. — Pioneering  West  of  the  Alleghanies . 

Westward  movement  of  population  and  of  agriculture,  147.  How  the  gov¬ 
ernment  policy  favored  settlement — the  federal  land  policy,  1785-1840,  151. 
The  credit  system,  153.  Land  speculation,  154.  Pre-emption  acts,  154.  Sig¬ 
nificance  of  the  recognition  of  pre-emption  rights,  155.  The  factors  deter¬ 
mining  agricultural  development  of  the  Ohio  valley — character  of  the  pioneer 
population,  156.  Physical  features  of  the  Ohio  Valley,  156.  Natural  clearings 
or  treeless  plains,  157.  Woodland  vs.  prairie  farming,  158.  Native  grasses, 
159.  Buffalo  grass  and  buffalo  clover,  160. 

Chapter  XII. — Pioneer  Farming  in  the  West — Economic  Conditions . 

Scarcity  of  capital  goods,  162.  Scarcity  of  farm  labor,  163.  Group  coopera¬ 
tion,  164.  Self-sufficiency — the  lack  of  markets,  164.  Progress  from  pioneer¬ 
ing  to  settled  farming,  165.  Livestock  and  its  management,  166.  Crops  and 
tillage,  168.  Corn  marketed  in  the  forms  of  whisky  and  pork,  169.  Wheat,  a 
cash  crop,  169.  Crop  yields,  170. 

Chapter  XIII. — Development  of  Internal  Trade  and  the  Beginnings  of  Com¬ 
mercial  Agriculture  in  the  West . 

Products  marketed  from  western  New  York,  171.  The  southern  market  for 
western  farm  products,  172.  Organization  of  marketing,  174.  Defects  of  the 
New  Orleans  market,  175.  Prices  of  farm  products  in  the  west,  175.  Eastern 
markets  for  livestock,  177.  Cattle  grazing  in  eastern  Ohio,  178.  Importation 
of  improved  English  cattle,  179.  Difficulties  of  overland  transportation, 

180.  Opening  of  the  Erie  canal  causes  westward  shift  in  wheat  production, 

181.  Other  commodities  produced  for  sale — cheese,  tobacco  and  wool,  182! 


CONTENTS 


IX 


Chapter  XIV. — Organization  and  Education  of  Farmers . 

The  spirit  of  improvement,  184.  The  first  agricultural  societies,  184.  Char¬ 
acter  of  their  membership,  185.  What  they  accomplished,  186.  Elkanah 
Watson  and  the  Berkshire  Argicultural  Society,  187.  Rapid  spread  of  socie¬ 
ties  on  the  Berkshire  Plan,  188.  The  policy  of  state  aid,  189.  The  climax  of 
rural  organization,  189.  The  causes  of  the  rise  and  decline  of  county 
societies,  190.  Relation  of  rural  organization  to  general  industrial  condi¬ 
tions,  191.  Disregard  of  production  costs  in  awarding  premiums,  192.  What 
the  county  societies  accomplished,  193.  Revival  of  state  aid — crop  bounties — 
agricultural  surveys,  193.  Agricultural  periodicals,  193.  Agricultural 
schools,  194. 

Chapter  XV. — Foreign  Trade  and  the  Home  Market . 

Decline  in  relative  importance  of  exports  of  farm  products,  196.  The  home 
market — its  significance,  197.  Increasing  density  of  population  in  the  east, 
199.  Urban  concentration,  200.  The  influence  of  the  home  market,  200. 
Improvements  in  New  England,  202.  Market  influences  more  effective  than 
educational  work,  202.  Differentiating  effect  of  the  market,  203. 

Chapter  XVI. — Farm  Labor  and  Labor-Saving  Machinery . 

Trend  cityward  aggravates  farm  labor  problem,  204.  Farm  wages  in 
Chester  County,  Pennsylvania,  205.  Trend  of  farm  wages  in  Massachusetts, 
206.  Agricultural  tools,  207.  Agricultural  machinery — improvements  in  the 
plow,  208.  Saving  of  labor  effected  by  new  plows,  210.  Harrows  and  cul¬ 
tivators,  210.  Harvesting  machinery,  212.  Horse  rakes,  213.  Threshing 
machines,  215. 

Chapter  XVII. — Livestock — Improvement  and  Specialization . 

Commerical  wool  growing,  217.  Introduction  of  Merino  sheep,  217.  Living¬ 
ston’s  description,  217.  Rapid  spread  of  Merinos,  218.  End  of  the  Merino 
craze,  219.  Importation  of  Saxony  sheep,  220.  Interest  in  mutton  types — 
New  Leicester,  220.  Summary  of  progress  to  1830,  221.  Climax  of  wool 
growing  in  the  East,  221.  The  importation  of  English  cattle,  223.  The  native 
cattle,  223.  Beef  production  in  the  Connecticut  Valley,  224.  The  Brighton 
Cattle  Market,  225.  Beginning  of  market  information  service,  226.  Western 
cattle  in  eastern  markets,  226.  Cattle  grass-fattened  in  Maine,  227.  Cattle 
fattening  in  Chester  County,  Pennsylvania,  227.  Dairy  products — cheese, 
butter,  milk,  227.  Westward  shift  of  dairying — developments  in  central  New 
York,  228.  Output  of  dairy  cows,  229.  Swine  show  marked  improvement, 
229.  Competition  of  western  swine  and  pork,  230.  Draft  animals,  231. 

Chapter  XVIII. — Crops  and  Tillage . 

Cropping  systems,  232.  Conservation  of  soil  fertility,  232.  Soil  amend¬ 
ments,  233.  Grass  land — hay  and  pasturage,  234.  Growth  of  markets  for 
hay  in  cities,  235.  Wheat — in  New  England,  236.  Effects  of  western  compe¬ 
tition,  237.  Enemies  of  the  wheat  crop,  238.  Introduction  of  new  varieties, 
239.  Wheat  yields,  239.  Corn,  240.  Minor  grains,  240.  Potatoes  and  other 
root  crops,  241.  Market  gardening,  242.  Orchards  and  vineyards,  243. 
Special  crops — hops,  243.  Broom  corn,  and  teasels,  245.  Tobacco,  246. 

Chapter  XIX. — Transition  from  Self-Sufficient  Economy  to  Commercial 

Agriculture.  Its  Difficulties — Its  Significance . 

Capital  and  credit,  247.  The  organization  of  markets,  249.  The  decline  of 
household  industries,  250.  Significance  of  decline  of  household  industries, 
251.  New  employments  for  farm  women,  252.  By-industries,  253.  Summary, 
254- 

PART  IV.— PERIOD  OF  TRANSFORMATION,  1840-1860. 

Chapter  XX. — Northern  Agriculture  in  1840 . 

New  England  farming  in  1840,  259.  In  eastern  and  central  New  York,  260. 
In  southeastern  Pennsylvania,  261.  The  Pennsylvania  barns,  262.  Lack  of 
progress  in  Maryland  and  in  Delaware,  262.  The  middle  region — wheat 
and  its  management,  262.  The  West,  263.  Farming  in  Kentucky  and  Mis¬ 
souri,  264.  Corn  and  cattle  fattening,  264. 

Chapter  XXI. — Influence  of  the  Prairies  on  the  Progress  of  Agriculture.. 
The  oak  openings  and  small  prairies,  267.  Why  had  earlier  settlers  avoided 
the  prairies?  268.  Conditions  favoring  settlement  of  prairies  after  1840, 

269.  Pioneering  on  the  prairies,  270.  Cost  of  developing  a  prairie  farm, 

270.  Buildings  on  prairie  farms,  271.  Fences,  271.  Soil  exploitation,  272. 
The  economic  basis  of  western  predatory  agriculture,  272. 


PAGE 

184 


196 


204 


217 


232 


247 


259 


266 


X 


CONTENTS 


PAGE 


Chapter  XXII. — Agricultural  Labor  and  Population .  274 

Wages  in  the  East  and  in  the  West,  274.  Scarcity  of  labor  on  prairie  farms, 

275.  Causes  of  increasing  scarcity  of  labor,  276.  Wages  in  1857,  277.  The 
westward  movement  of  population,  277. 

Chapter  XXIII. — Agricultural  Machinery .  281 


The  improvement  of  the  plow,  282.  The  introduction  of  steel  plows,  283. 

The  invention  of  the  reaper,  287.  Comparison  of  Hussey’s  and  McCormick’s 
inventions,  287.  Improvements  in  the  reaper,  288.  Use  of  reapers  in  the 
West,  1850,  290.  Headers  and  self-rakers,  291.  Geneva  trials  show  defects 
of  reapers  and  mowers,  292.  Victories  of  American  reaper  and  thresher  at 
Paris,  292.  Syracuse  trials  show  striking  improvements  in  reapers,  293. 
Saving  in  labor  effected  by  reapers,  293.  Development  of  mowing  machines, 

294.  Defects  of  early  mowers,  295.  The  saving  of  labor  effected  by  mowing 
machines,  296.  The  horse  rake,  296.  Other  haying  machines,  297.  Threshing 
machines,  297.  Seed  drills,  299.  Corn  planters,  300.  Cultivators,  302.  Sum¬ 
mary,  305. 

Chapter  XXIV. — Transportation  and  Markets .  306 

The  Erie  Canal — canal  building  in  the  West,  306.  Beginning  of  grain  trade 
on  the  Great  Lakes,  307.  Railroad  building  and  its  results,  307.  Markets, 

308.  Competition  of  southern  and  eastern  markets  for  western  produce, 

308.  Western  products  exported  from  southern  ports,  309.  Growth  of  the 
grain  trade  of  Buffalo  and  Chicago,  310.  The  eastern  market  for  western 
products,  31 1.  Export  markets,  312.  Prices — explanation  of  wide  geographic 
variations,  312. 

Chapter  XXV. — Diffusion  of  Information .  316 

Periodicals,  316.  Federal  aid  to  agriculture,  317.  Agricultural  societies,  317. 
Agricultural  leadership — John  Johnson,  318.  Science  and  agriculture — agri¬ 
cultural  chemistry,  319.  Liebig’s  mineral  theory,  319.  The  interest  in  agri¬ 
cultural  education — Michigan  Agricultural  College,  320. 

Chapter  XXVI. — Wheat  .  321 

The  decade  from  1840  to  1850,  321.  Wheat  in  New  England,  322.  State 
bounties,  324.  Causes  of  decline  of  wheat  growing  in  New  England,  324. 
Wheat  and  the  cropping  system  in  New  York,  325.  A  justification  of  sum¬ 
mer  fallow,  325.  Decline  of  wheat  growing  in  Hudson  and  Mohawk  valleys, 

326.  Wheat  in  Pennsylvania,  327.  Ohio’s  leadership,  1839  and  1849,  327. 

The  methods  of.  cultivation,  328.  Wheat  in  the  west,  1840,  329.  Increase  in 
wheat  production,  1840-1850,  329.  Specialization  in  Wisconsin  and  northern 
Illinois,  330.  Causes  of  crop  failures  on  prairie  farms,  330.  Systems  of 
wheat  cropping  on  the  prairies,  331.  Enemies  of  the  wheat  crop,  332.  Wheat 
production,  1850-1860,  333.  Ravages  of  the  midge  in  New  York  and  New 
England,  333.  Other  causes  of  decline  in  wheat  crops  in  the  East,  334. 
Progress  resulting  from  crop  failures — land  drainage  and  soil  improvement, 

334.  Declining  wheat  yield  in  Ohio,  335.  The  preeminence  of  the  West, 
1850-1860,  336.  Use  of  machinery  in  seeding  and  cultivating,  337.  Reapers 
and  threshers,  337. 

Chapter  XXVII. — Corn  .  339 

Better  tillage  and  fertilization  increases  corn  crop  in  the  East,  339.  In¬ 
creasing  corn  production  in  New  England,  1840-1850,  340.  Management  and 
harvesting  of  corn  in  the  East,  342.  Corn  in  Kentucky,  342.  Planting  and 
tillage  methods,  342.  In  the  Miami  and  Scioto  valleys  in  Ohio,  342.  Growing 
corn  on  wheat  farms  in  eastern  Ohio,  344.  Corn  as  a  first  crop  on  prairie 
farms,  345.  Methods  of  planting  and  cultivating,  345.  Difficulties  of  grow¬ 
ing  corn  on  the  prairies,  347.  Harvesting  practices,  347.  The  decade  1850- 


1860,  347- 

Chapter  XXVIII. — The  Minor  Cereals .  350 

Oats,  350.  Rye,  353.  Barley,  356. 

Chapter  XXIX. — Flax  and  Hemp .  359 


Flax  grown  for  seed  rather  than  for  oil,  359.  Local  markets  for  seed  and 
fibre,  361.  Decrease  in  fibre  and  increase  in  seed,  1850-1860,  363.  Hemp 
production  in  1840,  363.  Methods  of  cultivation  and  harvesting,  364. 
Attempts  to  produce  water-retted  hemp,  364. 


CONTENTS  XI 

PAGE 

Chapter  XXX. — Hay  .  366 


Importance  of  the  hay  crop  in  the  East,  366.  In  New  York — hay  on  uplands 
and  meadows,  368.  In  New  England,  369.  In  eastern  Pennsylvania,  369. 

In  Kentucky,  369.  Lack  of  success  with  cultivated  grasses  on  the  prairies, 

369.  Hay  more  of  a  cash  crop  in  the  East  after  1850,  370.  Increased  atten¬ 
tion  to  cultivated  grasses  in  the  West,  371.  Hay  proves  a  successful  crop 
on  prairie  farms,  371.  Marketing  of  western  hay,  371.  More  intensive 
methods  in  the  East,  372. 

Chapter  XXXI. — Potatoes  and  Roots .  373 

Markets  for  New  England  potatoes,  374.  The  appearance  of  the  potato 
disease — its  ravages,  374.  Decline  of  potato  production  shown  in  Census  of 
1850,  376.  Higher  prices  for  potatoes  cause  better  cultivation,  377.  Root 
crops — carrots,  turnips,  etc.,  379. 

Chapter  XXXII. — Fruits  and  Minor  Crops .  380 

Increased  planting  of  orchards  after  1840,  380.  Peach  orchards  in  Delaware 
and  Maryland,  380.  Vineyards  in  the  Ohio  and  Missouri  Valleys,  381. 
Special  crops,  382.  Tobacco  in  New  England  and  New  York,  382.  Hops, 

384. 

Chapter  XXXIII. — Beef  Production .  387 

The  centers  of  cattle  raising  in  1840,  387.  Beef  cattle  in  the  West,  388. 
Method  of  feeding  cattle  in  the  Scioto  Valley,  390.  Various  groups  inter¬ 
ested  in  the  fattening  of  western  cattle,  391.  Grazing  in  northern  Ohio,  391. 

Cattle  grazing  on  the  open  prairies,  392.  Winter  feeding  in  the  prairie 
region,  392.  Beginnings  of  cattle  fattening  in  the  Corn  Belt,  393.  Packing 
of  western  grass-fed  beef  in  Chicago,  393.  Cattle  in  Wisconsin  and 
Michigan,  393.  Effect  of  the  California  migration,  394.  The  eastern  cattle 
feeding  industry,  394.  In  Chester  County,  Pennsylvania,  395.  In  New  York, 
southern  and  eastern  counties,  395.  In  New  England,  396.  Description  of  the 
Brighton  market,  397.  Westward  shift  of  cattle  feeding,  398.  Effect  of 
railroad  transportation  on  New  England  cattle  feeding,  399.  Westward 
extension  of  railroads  ends  cattle  fattening  in  the  Scioto  Valley,  399.  West¬ 
ward  movement  of  cattle  feeding  and  grazing,  400.  Beginning  of  cattle 
driving  from  Texas,  400.  Types  of  native  cattle  found  in  Kentucky  and 
Ohio,  401.  Importation  of  improved  English  cattle,  401.  Oxen  vs.  horses 
as  draft  animals,  403.  Horses  replacing  oxen  in  the  East — reasons  for  the 
change,  404. 

Chapter  XXXIV. — Sheep  .  406 

Westward  movement  of  wool-growing,  1850-1860,  407.  Further  decline  of 
wool  growing  in  New  England  and  New  York — causes,  408.  In  New  York, 

410.  Medium  and  coarse-wooled  mutton  breeds  gain  in  the  East,  410.  In 
Pennsylvania,  412.  Increase  of  wool-growing  in  the  West,  412.  Wool¬ 
growing  on  the  prairies,  413.  Driving  sheep  westward,  414.  Sheep  driving 
from  central  Ohio  to  Chicago  in  1843,  414.  Eastern  sheep  farmers  move 
westward,  415.  Shelter  and  feeding  of  sheep  in  the  East  and  in  the  West, 

416.  Management  of  sheep  on  the  prairies,  417.  Sheep  driving  from  Illinois 
to  Texas  in  i860,  419.  Wheat  displaces  sheep  on  the  prairies  1850-1860, 

420.  In  Iowa,  420. 

Chapter  XXXV. — Dairying  .  421 

Growing  importance  of  dairy  industry  in  New  England,  421.  Dairying  in 
the  Hudson  and  Mohawk  valleys,  422.  Expansion  in  central  New  York, 

422.  Methods  of  making  butter  and  cheese,  424.  Butter  making  in  Orange 
County  (N.  Y.),  425.  Dairying  in  southeastern  Pennsylvania,  427.  Feeding 
methods  in  the  East,  427.  Cheese  production  in  the  Western  Reserve,  427. 

Wheat  vs.  dairying  west  of  Ohio,  428.  Butter  and  market  milk  displacing 
cheese,  1850-1860,  429.  Attempts  to  establish  cheese  factories  in  the  Western 
Reserve,  429.  Origin  of  the  associated  dairy  system,  430.  Production  records 
of  dairy  cows,  431.  Introduction  of  new  breeds  of  dairy  cattle,  432. 


XII 


CONTENTS 


PAGE 

Chapter  XXXVI. — Swine  .  435 

Hog  raising  on  dairy  farms  in  the  East,  435.  Cheap  pork  production  in  the 
West,  435.  Hog  raising  in  the  Corn  Belt,  437.  Decline  of  swine  raising 
in  the  East,  437.  Pork  packing  at  Cincinnati,  439.  Corn  and  hogs  in  the 


West,  440.  Types  of  hogs,  440.  The  common  hog  in  the  West,  441.  Chang¬ 
ing  standards  for  hog-breeding,  441. 

Chapter  XXXVII. — Poultry  .  442 

Chapter  XXXVIII. — Horses  and  Mules .  443 

Types  of  horses  raised  in  New  England,  in  Ohio  and  in  Kentucky,  443. 
Conflicting  standards  in  breeding — speed  vs.  strength,  446.  Raising  horses 
on  the  Illinois  prairies,  447.  Mule  breeding  in  Kentucky  and  Missouri,  447. 

Chapter  XXXIX. — Northern  Agriculture  in  i860 — A  Summary .  448 

The  causes  of  westward  migration,  448.  Tenancy  in  the  eastern  states,  449. 


The  characteristics  of  western  farming  in  i860,  449.  The  transformation 
of  eastern  agriculture,  450.  Changes  in  selection  of  farm  enterprises  more 
important  than  changes  in  cultural  methods,  451. 

CLASSIFIED  AND  CRITICAL  BIBLIOGRAPHY. 

Bibliographical  aids,  454.  General  collections  of  sources,  454.  General 
secondary  works,  456.  Material  on  agriculture  of  earliest  settlements, 
sources,  456;  secondary  works,  457.  Eighteenth  century  agriculture,  sources, 
458;  secondary  material,  461.  Westward  expansion,  sources,  462;  secondary 
material,  463.  Agricultural  progress  in  the  East,  sources,  464,  secondary 
material,  465.  The  Period  of  Transformation,  sources,  467;  secondary 


material,  472. 

Alphabetical  Index  of  Authors .  474 

Statistical  Appendix  .  493 


A  History  of  Northern  Agriculture 

1620  to  1840 


BY 

Percy  Wells  Bidwell,  Ph.  D. 


. 


' 


* 


Part  I 

AGRICULTURE  IN  THE  EARLIEST 

SETTLEMENTS 


\ 


■ 


■ 


■ 


Chapter  I. — Field  Husbandry  in  the  Earliest 

Settlements. 

DEPENDENCE  ON  NATURAL  FOOD  RESOURCES. 

The  earliest  efforts  of  the  colonists  to  get  a  living  in  the  New  World  could 
hardly  be  classed  as  agriculture.  They  resembled  rather  the  activities  of 
primitive  tribes  on  the  hunting  or  collection  stage  of  societal  evolution.  In 
all  the  earliest  settlements,  and  particularly  in  the  ill-equipped  Plymouth 
Colony,  the  indigenous  plants  and  the  wild  animals  were  largely  relied  upon 
as  food  resources  until  the  first  crops  could  be  harvested.  The  natural  food 
resources  of  the  Atlantic  Coastal  Plain  were  varied  and  abundant.  Berries  of 
many  kinds  flourished  in  profusion;  blackberries,  raspberries,  huckleberries, 
gooseberries,  cranberries,  and,  perhaps  most  acceptable  of  all,  wild  straw¬ 
berries.  Roger  Williams  remarked  that  the  wild  strawberries  were  the  best 
of  all  natural  fruits  in  Rhode  Island,  adding:  “In  some  parts  where  the 
Natives  have  planted,  I  have  many  times  seen  as  many  as  would  fill  a  good 
ship  within  a  few  miles  compasse 1 

In  June  they  were  so  plentiful,  says  Denton,2  “  that  the  Fields  and  Woods 
are  died  red.”  Wild  cherries  and  wild  grapes  and  crabapples  were  to  be  had 
for  the  picking,  not  very  appetizing  according  to  our  present  ideas,  but 
evidently  acceptable  to  the  hungry  settlers.  In  the  woods  they  found  nuts 
and  roots;  in  New  England  the  so-called  groundnuts,  the  tubers  on  the  roots 
of  the  Apios  tuberosa,  are  frequently  mentioned ;  in  New  Jersey  and  Delaware 
some  use  was  made  of  the  tuckahoe,  a  large,  globular,  underground  food 
plant. 

But  the  earliest  settlers  were  not  restricted  to  a  vegetarian  diet ;  the  woods 
and  waters  abounded  with  a  variety  of  game  and  fish.  There  were  partridges, 
turkeys,  and  pigeons,  the  latter  often  in  incredible  numbers.  Van  der  Donck  3 
refers  to  the  astonishing  plenty  of  wild  pigeons : 

“  Those  are  most  numerous  in  the  spring  and  fall  of  the  year,  when  they  are  seen 
in  such  numbers  in  flocks  that  they  resemble  the  clouds  in  the  heavens,  and  obstruct 
the  rays  of  the  sun.  Many  of  those  birds  are  shot  in  the  spring  and  fall,  on  the  wing, 
and  from  the  dry  trees  whereon  they  prefer  to  alight,  and  will  sit  in  great  numbers  to 
see  around  them,  from  which  they  are  easily  shot.  Many  are  also  shot  on  the  ground, 
and  it  is  not  uncommon  to  kill  twenty-five  or  more  at  a  time.” 

Wild  geese  and  ducks  were  plentiful,  and  often  by  killing  a  deer  a  supply 
of  red  meat  was  procured.  The  fish  taken  from  the  ocean  and  streams  were 
supplemented  by  shellfish,  particularly  clams  and  oysters. 

But  in  the  midst  of  this  seeming  plenty  the  colonists  were  often  on  the 
verge  of  starvation.  Reversion  to  a  stage  of  civilization  which  the  race  had 
outgrown  a  thousand  years  ago  was  not  easy.  They  were  too  “  civilized  ”  to 
get  a  living  from  the  woods,  the  shore,  and  the  streams  with  as  little  effort 

1  Key  to  the  Indian  Language,  in  R.  I.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  I,  90. 

2  Brief  Description  of  New  York  (1670),  p.  4. 

3  In  N.  Y.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  2d  series,  I,  173. 

5 


6 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


as  the  Indians.  Moreover,  it  is  probable  that  a  prejudice  against  fish  and 
game  diet  prevented  the  colonists  making  use  of  the  wild  food  until  actually 
starved  into  it ;  and  besides,  they  were  not  skilled  woodsmen.  As  Channing  4 
remarks  of  the  Pilgrims : 

“  In  those  days,  middle  class  Englishmen  knew  little  of  sport.  In  England  and  in 
Holland,  not  one  of  them  probably  had  ever  gone  in  pursuit  of  a  wild  animal,  and  few, 
if  any  had  ever  caught  a  fish.”  5 

THE  FIRST  HOUSES. 

Before  much  attention  could  be  given  to  clearing  and  tilling  fields  there 
had  to  be  provided  some  kind  of  temporary  shelter.  The  original  farm  dwell¬ 
ings  in  America  were  not  the  log  houses  so  familiar  in  pioneer  tales,  but  tents 
and  dugouts.  Log  houses  could  not  be  erected  at  once  by  unskilled  woodsmen, 
and  meanwhile  temporary  shelters  were  formed  by  digging  into  a  bank  and 
erecting  a  sort  of  roof  over  the  open  end  of  the  cave.6  Van  Tienhoven  7  wrote : 

“  Those  in  New  Netherland  and  especially  in  New  England,  who  have  no  means  to 
build  farm  houses  at  first  according  to  their  wishes,  dig  a  square  pit  in  the  ground, 
cellar  fashion,  6  or  7  feet  deep,  as  long  and  as  broad  as  they  think  proper,  case  the 
earth  inside  with  wood  all  round  the  wall,  and  line  the  wood  with  the  bark  of  trees  or 
something  else  to  prevent  the  caving  in  of  the  earth;  floor  this  cellar  with  plank  and 
wainscot  it  overhead  for  a  ceiling,  raise  a  roof  of  spars  clear  up  and  cover  the  spars  with 
bark  or  green  sods,  so  that  they  can  live  dry  and  warm  in  these  houses  with  their  entire 
families  for  two,  three  and  four  years,  it  being  understood  that  partitions  are  run 
through  those  cellars  which  are  adapted  to  the  size  of  the  family.  The  wealthy  and 
principal  men  in  New  England,  in  the  beginning  of  the  Colonies,  commenced  their  first 
dwelling  houses  in  this  fashion  for  two  reasons ;  firstly,  in  order  not  to  waste  time 
building  and  not  to  want  food  the  next  season ;  secondly,  in  order  not  to  discourage 
poorer  laboring  people  whom  they  brought  over  in  numbers  from  Fatherland.  In  the 
course  of  3  @  4  years,  when  the  country  became  adapted  to  agriculture,  they  built 
themselves  handsome  houses,  spending  on  them  several  thousands.” 

NATURAL  CLEARINGS  OR  OPENINGS. 

The  first  task  of  pioneer  agriculture  was  the  preparation  of  the  land  for 
planting.  It  has  often  been  asserted  that  all  the  regions  in  North  America 
first  occupied  by  European  peoples  were  covered  by  dense  forests.8  This  how- 


4  United  States,  I,  310. 

5  Some  of  the  sources  which  mention  the  reliance  of  the  colonists  on  natural  food 

resources  are:  Graves,  I.etter  sent  from  New  England,  in  Young’s  Chronicles, 
264-266;  Bradford,  Plymouth  Plantation,  149;  Higginson,  New  England  Plantation, 
in  Young’s  Chronicles,  252;  Hubbard  General  History  of  New  England,  in  Mass. 
Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  2d  Series,  V,  23;  Johnson,  Wonder  Working  Providence,  77, 
83;  Josselyn,  Two  Voyages  to  New  England,  in  Mass.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections, 
3d  Series,  III,  259;  Clarke,  Four  Chief est  Plantations,  30;  Representation  of  New 
Netherland,  in  Jameson’s  Narratives,  295;  Megapolensis,  Short  Account  of  the 
Mohawk  Indians,  in  Jameson’s  Narratives,  168;  Scot,  Model  of  the  Government 
of  East  New  Jersey,  in  N.  J.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  I,  279,  299.  The  accuracy  of 
the  source  accounts  has  been  checked  by  Goodale  in  his  article,  New  England  Plants 
Seen  by  the  Earliest  Colonists,  in  Publ.  Col.  Soc.  Mass.  Transactions,  III,  189-194. 
Lists  of  indigenous  plants  known  by  the  American  Indians  are  given  by  Holmes  in 
Bailey’s  Cyclopedia,  IV,  26,  and  by  Palmer  in  U.  S.  Dept.  Agric.  Annual  Report, 
1870,  pp.  404-428. 

6  Such  dugouts  are  described  by  Johnson,  Wonder  Working  Providence,  65,  113;  by 

Stiles,  Ancient  Windsor,  I.  33;  Letter  of  John  Jones  ( from  Pennsylvania) ,  in 
Myers’s  Narratives,  457.  Cellar  dwellers  are  mentioned  in  the  New  Haven  Colony 
Records,  70. 

7  In  O’Callaghan’s  Documentary  History  of  New  York,  IV,  31. 

8  E.  g.,  Shaler,  Physiography  of  North  America,  in  Winsor’s  America,  IV,  p.  xiv. 


FIELD  HUSBANDRY 


7 


ever  is  far  from  true.  The  earliest  settlers  found  numerous  “  natural  ” 
clearings  or  openings  along  the  Coastal  Plain,  most  frequently  along  the  banks 
of  rivers  and  small  streams.  The  author  of  The  Planters  Plea  (1630) 9  wrote 
regarding  New  England : 

“  The  Land  affords  void  ground  enough  to  receive  more  people  then  this  State  can 
spare,  and  that  not  onely  wood  grounds,  and  others,  which  are  unfit  for  present  use: 
but,  in  many  places,  much  cleared  ground  for  tillage,  and  large  marshes  for  hay  and 
feeding  of  cattle,  which  comes  to  passe  by  the  desolatio  hapning  through  a  three  yeeres 
Plague,  about  twelve  or  sixteene  yeeres  past,  which  swept  away  most  of  the  Inhabitants 
all  along  the  Sea  coast,  and  in  some  places  utterly  consumed  man,  woman  &  childe,  so 
that  there  is  no  person  left  to  lay  claime  to  the  soyle  which  they  possessed ;  ” 

Another  letter  describing  conditions  in  the  same  region  speaks  of  “  Open 
plains,  in  some  places  five  hundred  acres,  some  places  more,  some  less,  not 
much  troublesome  for  to  clear  for  the  plough  to  go  in  ;  .  .  .  10  The  earliest 

settlers  in  the  Connecticut  valley  found  much  meadow  land  free  from  trees 
at  Hartford  and  farther  north.  In  Whately  (Mass.)  : 

“Both  the  east  and  west  side  settlers  found  the  meadows  and  adjacent  uplands  ready 
for  grazing  and  tillage.  There  was  needed  no  preliminary  work  of  clearing  off  the 
forests.  They  began  to  plant  corn,  and  sow  wheat  and  flax,  and  mow  the  grass  the 
first  season.” *  11 

In  the  region  around  the  mouth  of  the  Hudson  River  and  southward  to 
the  Delaware  such  openings  were  more  frequent.  On  David  De  Vries’s  plan¬ 
tation  on  North  River  there  were  31  morgens  (about  60  acres)  of  “  maize- 
land,  where  there  were  no  trees  to  remove ;  and  hay-land  lying  all  together, 
sufficient  for  two  hundred  cattle,  .  .  .  .”  12  Van  der  Donck  emphasized  the 
presence  of  clearings  in  his  Description  of  Nezv  Netherlands  (1656)  : 13 

“  Near  the  rivers  and  water  sides  there  are  large  extensive  plains  containing  several 
hundred  morgens ;  in  one  place  more  and  in  another  less,  which  are  very  convenient  for 
plantations,  villages  and  towns.  There  also  are  brooklands  and  fresh  and  salt  meadows; 
some  so  extensive  that  the  eye  cannot  oversee  the  same.  Those  are  good  for  pasturage 
and  hay,  although  the  same  are  overflowed  by  the  spring  tides,  particularly  near  the 

seaboard . We  also  find  meadow  grounds  far  inland,  which  are  all  fresh  and 

make  good  hayland.” 

In  Pennsylvania  an  early  settler  found  similar  conditions : 14 

“  And  one  thing  more  I  shall  tell  you.  I  know  a  man  together  with  two  or  three 
more,  that  have  happened  upon  a  piece  of  Land  of  some  Hundred  Acres,  that  is  all 
cleare,  without  Trees,  Bushes,  stumps,  that  may  be  Plowed  without  let,  the  farther  a 
man  goes  in  the  Country  the  more  such  Land  they  find.  There  is  also  good  Land,  full 
of  Large  and  small  Trees,  and  some  good  Land,  but  few  Trees  on  it.” 

A  pioneer  colonist  of  East  New  Jersey  wrote  home  shortly  after  his  arrival 
(1685). 15 

“  I  am  settled  here  in  a  very  pleasant  place,  upon  the  side  of  a  brave  plain  (almost  free 
of  woods)  and  near  the  water  side,  so  that  I  might  yoke  a  Plough  where  I  please.” 

9  In  Force,  Tracts,  II,  14. 

10  Thomas  Graves,  Letter  sent  from  New  England  (1629),  in  Young’s  Chronicles,  265. 

11  Temple,  Whately,  13;  see  also  Judd,  Hadley,  97;  Love,  Colonial  Hartford,  136. 

12  De  Vries  in  Jameson’s  Narratives,  205. 

13  In  N.  Y.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  2d  Series,  I,  148. 

14  Letter  of  Thomas  Paschall  (1683)  in  Myers’s  Narratives,  254. 

15  N.  J.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  I,  326.  Other  references  to  clearings  are  frequent  in 

the  source  materials  reprinted  in  Myers’s  Narratives  of  Early  Pennsylvania  and 
Jameson’s  Narratives  of  New  Netherland. 


8 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


ORIGIN  OF  CLEARINGS. 

The  origin  of  the  cleared  spaces  is  not  altogether  certain.  We  know  that 
many  such  openings  were  abandoned  corn  fields  of  the  Indians.  Plymouth  and 
many  other  New  England  towns  were  built  on  open  spaces  formerly  cultivated 
by  the  Indians  16  and  in  New  Netherland  the  old  maize  fields  were  an  often- 
described  feature  of  the  landscape.17  The  periodical  burning  of  the  woods  by 
the  Indians  in  order  to  facilitate  the  pursuit  of  game  was  undoubtedly  largely 
responsible  for  the  existence  of  clearings. 

“  From  early  times  the  Indians  had  been  accustomed  to  burn  over  the  whole  country 
annually  in  November,  after  the  leaves  had  fallen  and  the  grass  had  become  dry,  which 
kept  the  meadows  clean,  and  prevented  any  growth  of  underbrush  on  the  uplands.  One 
by  one  the  older  trees  would  give  way,  and  thus  many  cleared  fields,  or  tracts  with  only 
here  and  there  a  tree,  would  abound,  where  the  sod  would  be  friable,  ready  for  the  plow ; 
or  be  already  well  covered  with  grass,  ready  for  pasturage.  The  meadow  lands  thus 
burnt  over,  threw  out  an  early  and  rich  growth  of  nutritious  grasses,  which,  if  let  alone, 
grew  ‘up  to  a  man’s  face.’  ”  18 

Whatever  their  origin,  there  is  no  doubt  of  the  saving  of  labor  which  such 
open  spaces  presented  to  the  earliest  settlers. 

HOW  THE  LAND  WAS  CLEARED. 

The  task  of  clearing  heavily  wooded  land  was  especially  formidable  to  the 
European  immigrants,  unskilled  in  woodcraft.  The  open  places  were  un¬ 
doubtedly  utilized  often  for  raising  the  first  season’s  crops,  but  they  were 
limited  in  extent  and  their  fertility  had  been  depleted  by  the  Indians.  Con¬ 
sequently  the  clearing  of  wooded  lands  must  have  begun  very  soon.  There 
were  two  essential  objects  in  clearing  new  land:  (i)  to  admit  sunlight  to  the 
soil  by  removing  the  foliage  which  shaded  it ;  (2)  to  remove  the  obstructions 
to  the  tillage  of  the  soil,  the  stumps  and  roots  of  the  trees.  The  first  of  these 
objects  was  the  prime  essential  and  was  accomplished  by  the  Indians  by  gird¬ 
ling  the  trees.  An  incision  was  made  through  the  bark  all  around  the  trunk 
and  the  trees  were  left  to  die  standing.19  The  colonists  borrowed  the  practice 
of  girdling,  as  well  as  the  custom  of  burning  the  woods  and  meadows,  from 
the  Indians.  It  was  a  labor-saving  process,  but  it  had  certain  defects :  the 
dead  trees  fell  eventually,  endangering  the  lives  of  the  colonists  and  their 
cattle,  and  then  the  dead  timber  obstructed  cultivation  until  it  was  removed. 
Nevertheless  girdling  persisted  as  a  method  of  clearing  for  the  first  two 
centuries  of  northern  agriculture.20 

A  method  more  satisfactory  in  the  long  run  was  to  cut  down  the  trees  and 
burn  all  the  timber  not  wanted  for  building  or  fencing  purposes.  Van  Tien- 
hoven  advised  new  settlers  to  arrive  in  the  spring,  in  April  at  the  latest,  so 
as  to  employ  the  whole  summer  in  clearing  land  and  building  houses. 

16  Adams,  in  Essex  Institute  Historical  Collections ,  XIX,  155. 

17  See  Jogues  in  Jamesons’  Narratives ,  261 ;  Van  Tienhoven  in  O’Callaghan’s  Doc.  Hist. 

N.  Y.,  IV,  28. 

18  Temple,  Whately,  13. 

19  This  operation  was  described  by  Capt.  John  Smith.  See  Mass.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections, 

3d  Series,  III,  38.  Also  by  Belknap,  New  Hampshire,  III,  131. 

20  See  the  description  of  clearing  at  Concord,  N.  H.  (ca.  1800),  by  Dwight,  Travels 

(edition  of  1823),  II,  114. 


FIELD  HUSBANDRY 


9 


“  All  then  who  arrive  in  New  Netherland  must  immediately  set  about  preparing  the 
soil,  so  as  to  be  able,  if  possible  to  plant  some  winter  grain,  and  to  proceed  the  next 
winter  to  cut  and  clear  the  timber.  The  trees  are  usually  felled  from  the  stump,  cut  up 
and  burnt  in  the  field,  unless  such  as  are  suitable  for  building,  for  palisades,  posts  and 
rails . ”  21 

In  New  England  as  well  as  in  New  Netherland  the  first  settlers  seem  to 
have  been  reluctant  to  adopt  the  primitive  hoe-culture  of  the  aborigines.  They 
could  not  believe  that  a  crop  could  be  raised  on  new  land  until  it  had  first 
been  “  stubbed,”  i.  e.,  until  all  the  roots  of  small  trees  and  shrubs  had  been 
dug  out.  John  Pynchon,  of  Springfield,  Massachusetts,  recorded  in  his  account 
books  (1668-1680),  many  agreements  with  men  who  were  to  stub,  clear  and 
plow  new  land.  “  They  were  to  girdle  large  trees,  cut  down  and  clear  off 
smaller  trees,  and  grub  up  the  roots  of  the  little  trees  and  bushes.”  22  Jared 
Eliot 23  commented  on  this  fact  as  follows  : 

“Their  [the  first  settlers’]  unacquaintedness  with  the  Country,  led  them  to  make  choice 
of  the  worst  Land  for  their  Improvement,  and  the  most  expensive  and  chargeable 
Methods  of  Cultivation :  They  tho’t  themselves  obliged  to  stubb  all  Staddle,  and  cut 
down  or  lop  all  great  Trees;  in  which  they  expended  much  Cost  and  Time,  to  the 
prejudice  of  the  Crop  and  impoverishing  the  Land.” 

THE  FIRST  CROPS. 

The  chief  grain  crop  in  the  North  Atlantic  colonies  from  the  beginning 
was  the  Indian  corn  or  maize.  Although  unknown  to  Europeans  before  the 
discovery  of  the  New  World,  it  had  so  many  advantages  as  a  pioneering  crop 
that  it  took  precedence  immediately  over  the  cereals  with  which  they  were 
familiar  and  the  seed  of  which  they  had  brought  with  them. 

Among  the  inventories  of  50  estates  in  Essex  County,  Massachusetts, 
there  are  16  in  which  crops  are  mentioned,  either  in  the  field  or  in  the  barn. 
Altogether  666  bushels  of  6  different  sorts  of  grain  were  inventoried.  On 
practically  every  farm  which  reported  any  grain,  Indian  corn  was  mentioned 
and  in  amounts  exceeding  those  of  other  cereals.  Some  indication  of  the  rela¬ 
tive  importance  of  corn,  wheat,  and  other  cereals  may  be  obtained  from 
table  1. 


Table  i. 


Crop. 

Times 

mentioned. 

Quantity. 

Indian  corn  . 

15 

bushels. 

275 

Wheat  . 

12 

152 

Barley  . 

7 

7*i 

Peas  . 

4 

Oats  . 

2 

60 

Rye  . 

6 

5i 

Flax  . 

3 

Hay  . 

4 

Hemp  . 

1 

I 

21  In  O’Callaghan’s  Doc .  Hist,  of  N.  Y.,  IV,  30. 

22  Judd,  Hadley,  432. 

23  Field  Husbandry  (edition  of  1760),  1.  Schoepf  has  similar  remarks  regarding  the 

first  residents  of  Pennsylvania.  Travels,  I,  264. 


10 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


The  inventories  of  17  Connecticut  estates  probated  1639-1648  24  show  In¬ 
dian  corn  the  predominant  cereal,  but  with  wheat  a  stronger  competitor  than 
in  Essex  County.  Peas,  rye,  barley,  and  oats  follow  in  approximately  the 
order  named. 

The  following  extracts  from  inventories  give  a  picture  of  the  grain  crops 
raised  on  specific  farms : 

Estate  Henry  Roffe,  Newbury:  12  bushels  Indian  Corn;  9  bushels  wheat;  2  bushels 
pease. 

Estate  Hugh  Churchman,  Lynn:  20  bushels  wheat;  4  bushels  Indian  corn;  2  bushels 
barley;  corn  on  the  ground. 

Estate  John  Talbey,  Salem:  20  bushels  Indian  corn;  3  pecks  oats. 

Estate  John  Goffe,  Newbury:  7  bushels  Indian  corn;  1  bushel  English  wheat;  1  bushel 
mault ;  1  bushel  meal. 

Estate  T.  Nowell,  Windsor:  7  bushels  rye;  3  bushels  malt;  20  bushels  pease;  22  bushels 
wheat;  10  bushels  Indian  corn. 

Estate  R.  Myman,  Hartford:  1  acre  meslin;  1  acre  summer  wheat;  1  acre  oats;  3  roods 
pease  and  barley;  5  acres  Indian  corn. 

Estate  T.  Dewy,  Hartford:  5  acres  of  corn  upon  the  ground;  7  other  acres  of  corn 
upon  the  ground ;  hemp  and  flax. 

The  predominance  of  maize  over  other  cereals  in  New  England  from  the 
beginning  is  clearly  indicated  by  the  contemporary  account  of  the  food  of 
the  early  settlers.  With  stewed  pumpkins  and  bean  or  pea  porridge,  Indian 
meal  or  samp  was  the  staple  article  of  diet.  Maize  yielded  more  food  per 
acre  than  the  European  grains ;  its  yield  was  more  uniform,  being  less  de¬ 
pendent  on  the  changes  of  seasons ;  it  ripened  early,  being  ready  for  harvest  in 
four  months  from  the  time  of  planting,  and  in  some  respects  it  was  a  labor- 
saving  crop.  When  planted  in  the  Indian  fashion  among  the  stumps  or  the 
trunks  of  girdled  trees,  it  required  much  less  preparation  of  the  soil  than 
the  colonists  deemed  necessary  for  other  cereals. 

INDIAN  MANAGEMENT  OF  MAIZE. 

The  Indian  management  of  maize  was  described  by  a  contemporary  ob¬ 
server  as  follows : 25 

“  It  is  Planted  between  the  middle  of  March  and  the  beginning  of  June.  But  most  com¬ 
monly  from  the  middle  of  April  to  middle  of  May.  Some  of  the  Indians  take  the 
time  of  the  coming  up  of  a  Fish,  called  Aloofes,  into  the  Rivers.  Others  of  the  budding 
of  some  Trees.26 

“  In  the  pure  Northerly  parts,  they  have  a  peculiar  kind  called  Mohauks  Corn,  which 
though  planted  in  June,  will  be  ripe  in  season.  The  stalks  of  this  kind  are  shorter, 
and  the  Ears  grow  nearer  the  bottom  of  the  stalk,  and  are  generally  of  divers  colours. 

“  The  manner  of  Planting  is  in  Rows,  at  equal  distance  every  way,  about  5.  or  6.  feet. 
They  open  the  Earth  with  the  Howe,  taking  away  the  surface  3.  or  4.  inches  deep,  and 
the  bredth  of  the  Howe,  and  so  throw  in  4.  or  5.  Granes,  a  little  distant  one  from 
another,  and  cover  them  with  Earth.  If  two  or  three  grow,  it  may  do  well.  For  some 
of  them  are  usually  destroyed  by  Birds,  or  Mouse-Squirrels. 

“  The  Corn  grown  up  an  hands  length,  they  cut  up  the  weeds,  and  loosen  the  Earth, 
about  it,  with  a  broad  Howe ;  repeating  this  labour,  as  the  Weeds  grow.  When  the 

24  Conn.  Colony  Public  Records,  I. 

25  Letter  of  Governor  John  Winthrop,  jr.,  of  Connecticut,  Published  in  Philosophical 

Transactions  of  the  Royal  Society  of  London,  XII  (1678),  1065. 

26  Belknap  says:  “Yet,  their  judgment  of  the  proper  season  for  planting,  cannot  be 

amended.  It  was  when  the  leaves  of  the  white  oak  are  as  big  as  the  ear  of  a  mouse.” 
New  Hampshire,  III,  93. 


FIELD  HUSBANDRY 


11 


Stalk  begins  to  grow  high,  they  draw  a  little  Earth  about  it :  and  upon  the  putting  forth 
of  the  Eare,  so  much,  as  to  make  a  little  Hill,  like  Hop-Hill.  After  this,  they  have  no 
other  business  about  it,  till  Harvest.  .  .  . 

“  The  Natives  commonly  Thresh  it  as  they  gather  it,  dry  it  well  on  Mats  in  the  Sun, 
and  then  bestow  it  in  holes  in  the  Ground  (which  are  their  Barns)  well  lined  with 
withered  Grass  and  Matts,  and  then  covered  with  the  like,  and  over  all  with  Earth : 
and  so  its  kept  very  well,  till  they  use  it.  .  .  . 

“  Where  the  Ground  is  bad  or  worn  out,  the  Indians  used  to  put  two  or  three  of  the 
forementioned  Fishes,  under  or  adjacent  to  each  Corn-hill,  whereby  they  had  many 
times  a  Crop  double  to  what  the  Ground  would  otherwise  have  produced. 

“  The  English  have  learned  the  like  Husbandry,  where  these  Aloof es  come  up  in 
great  plenty,  or  where  they  are  near  the  Fishing-stages ;  having  there  the  Heads  and 
Garbage  of  Cod-fish  in  abundance,  at  no  charge  but  the  fetching.  .  .  . 

“  The  Indians,  and  some  English  (especially  in  good  Ground,  and  well  fished)  at 
every  Corn-hill,  plant  with  the  Corn,  a  kind  of  French  or  Twr&cy-Beans :  The  Stalks 
of  the  Corn  serving  instead  of  Poles  for  the  Beans  to  climb  up  with.  And  in  the 
vacant  places  between  the  Hills  they  will  Plant  squashes  and  Pompions;  loading  the 
Ground  with  as  much  as  it  will  bear." 

The  Dutch  settlers  followed  the  Indian  methods  closely: 

“  When  the  timber  has  been  removed,  and  the  brush  burnt  up,  then  we  take  a  broad 
hoe,  and  cut  out  hills  about  six  feet  apart,  and  plant  five  or  six  grains  in  a  hill,  with 
which  some  persons  also  plant  Turkey  beans  [as  before  noticed].  After  the  grain 
shoots  up  and  grows,  it  requires  two  dressings.  The  weeding  and  cleaning  is  done  with 
a  broad  adze,  without  breaking  up  the  ground,  and  is  not  very  laborious  work.  The 
weeds  and  trash  in  the  first  dressing,  are  cut  off  and  placed  in  a  row  between  the  hills. 
The  second  dressing  is  easier.  Then  the  weeds  and  sprouts  are  cut  off  around  the  hills, 
and  the  weeds  and  rubbish  of  the  first  cleaning,  are  drawn  round  the  corn-hills,  which 
afterwards  grow  high  and  tall,  and  smother  all  the  weeds,  stumps,  and  trash,  and  kill 
all  other  vegetation  except  pumpkins ;  those  will  grow  among  the  maize.”  27 

CULTIVATION  OF  MAIZE  BY  ENGLISH  SETTLERS. 

The  English  settlers  in  Connecticut  before  1678  had  introduced  the  use  of 
the  plough  in  cultivating  maize.  Winthrop  added  to  his  description  of  In¬ 
dian  agriculture : 

“  The  English  have  now  taken  to  a  better  way  of  Planting  by  the  help  of  the  Plough ; 
in  this  manner;  in  the  Planting  time  they  Plough  single  Furrows  through  the  whole 
Field,  about  6  feet  distant,  more  or  less,  as  they  see  convenient.  To  these,  they  Plough 
others  a  cross  at  the  same  distance.  Where  these  meet  they  throw  in  the  Corn,  and  cover 
it  either  with  the  Howe,  or  by  running  another  Furrow  with  the  Plough.  When  the 
Weeds  begin  to  overtop  the  Corn,  then  they  Plough  over  the  rest  of  the  field  between 
the  Planted  Furrows,  and  so  turn  in  the  Weeds.  This  is  repeated  once,  when  they 
begin  to  Hill  the  Corn  with  the  Howe ;  and  so  the  Ground  is  better  loosened  than  with 
the  Howe,  and  the  Roots  of  the  Corn  have  more  liberty  to  spread.  Where  any  Weeds 
escape  the  Plough,  they  use  the  Howe.”  28 

Among  the  hills  of  the  corn  were  planted  beans  29  and  pumpkins,  after  the 
multiple-cropping  system  of  the  Indians.  The  stalks  served  as  poles  for  the 
beans  to  climb  upon.  The  importance  of  corn  is  shown  by  its  early  acceptance 
as  a  payment  in  kind  for  taxes.30  Corn  seems  to  have  served  in  all  the  col- 


27  Van  der  Donck,  in  N.  Y.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  2d  series,  I,  158. 

28  Winthrop,  Royal  Society  of  London  Philosophical  Transactions,  XII,  10 66.  Ploughs 

were  used  in  the  cultivation  of  Indian  corn  in  the  Massachusetts  Bay  Colony,  as 
early  as  1687.  See  Report  of  a  French  Protestant  Refugee,  34. 

29  Phaseolus  vulgaris,  known  to  the  colonists  as  French  or  Turkey  beans. 

30  New  Haven  Colonial  Records  (1641),  60. 


12 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


onies  as  a  preliminary  crop  before  other  grains.  An  English  writer  of  1670  31 
says  of  New  England  that  the  ground  must  first  be  planted  with  Indian  corn 
before  it  will  be  fit  for  English  seed,  and  Pastorius  writes  from  Pennsylvania 
in  1700:  “  Also  one  cannot,  the  first  year,  plant  either  wheat  or  rye  in  such 
new  land,  but  only  Indian  ....  corn,  .  .  .  .  ”  32  The  hoeing  of  the 
corn  killed  out  the  weeds  and  cleaned  the  land  for  the  succeeding  less  thrifty 
crop. 

EUROPEAN  GRAINS. 

Among  the  European  grains  grown  in  the  earliest  settlements  we  find  the 
following  most  frequently  mentioned :  wheat,  rye,  barley,  oats,  buckwheat,  and 
peas.  Wheat  was  the  most  highly  esteemed  if  not  the  most  widely  consumed 
European  breadstuff,  and  it  was  natural  that  the  newcomers  should  make 
especial  efforts  to  introduce  it  in  their  new  homes.  The  earliest  attempts  to 
raise  wheat  in  Plymouth  in  1621,  so  Bradford  informs  us,  proved  a  failure, 
and  it  seems  not  to  have  become  an  important  crop  there  until  at  least  a 
generation  later.33  Meanwhile  it  had  become  important  enough  in  some  New 
England  towns,  at  least,  to  be  receivable  for  taxes  as  early  as  1640.34  In 
the  fertile  alluvial  soil  of  the  Connecticut  Valley  wheat  showed  early  promise 
of  successful  cultivation.  We  find  it  mentioned  in  inventories  of  estates  of 
Hartford  settlers  as  early  as  1641, 35  and  during  the  remainder  of  the  seven¬ 
teenth  century  this  valley  was  the  best  grain-producing  region  in  New  Eng¬ 
land.  In  Northampton,  Hadley,  and  Hatfield,  says  Judd,36  every  farmer  raised 
wheat,  and  wheaten  bread  was  common.  Large  quantities  of  wheat  were 
shipped  from  this  region  to  Boston.  The  account  book  of  John  Pynchon,  a 
trader  of  Springfield,37  shows  shipments  of  wheat  amounting  to  1,500  bushels 
after  the  harvest  of  1652.  In  the  Middle  Colonies  wheat  seems  to  have  been 
successful  from  the  first.  Samples  of  wheat  grown  in  New  Netherland  were 
sent  back  to  Holland  in  1626  along  with  other  European  grains  38  and  after 
that  date  we  find  it  mentioned  frequently.  It  succeeded  particularly  well  on 
the  “  flats  ”  at  Esopus  on  the  Hudson.39  In  Penn’s  colony  wheat  is  mentioned 
first  among  European  grains  in  all  source  accounts.40 

Wheat  and  other  European  cereals  were  cultivated  in  New  Amsterdam 
more  intensively  than  Indian  corn.  Van  der  Donck  41  wrote : 

“  The  land  whereon  there  are  few  standing  trees,  and  which  has  been  grubbed  and 
ploughed  twice,  we  hold  to  be  prepared  for  a  crop  of  winter  grain.  For  summer  grain 
one  ploughing  is  sufficient.  If  it  is  intended  to  sow  the  same  field  again  with  winter 
grain,  then  the  stubble  is  ploughed  in,  and  the  land  is  sowed  with  wheat  or  rye,  which 
in  ordinary  seasons  will  yield  a  fine  crop.” 

31  Clarke,  Four  Chief est  Plantations,  30. 

32  Myers’s  Narratives,  405. 

33  History  of  Plymouth  Plantation,  116;  Stine,  Economic  History  of  Wheat  in  America, 

MS.,  chap.  Ill,  p.  28. 

34  Felt,  Ipswich  (Mass.),  46. 

35  Love,  Colonial  Hartford,  156. 

36  Hadley,  353. 

37  Stine,  in  MS.  History  of  Wheat,  chap.  Ill,  p.  31. 

38  N.  Y.  Documents  Relative  to  Colonial  History,  I,  37. 

39  Danckaerts,  Journal,  324. 

40  Myers’s  Narratives,  240,  301,  323,  267. 

41  N.  Y.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  2d  series,  I,  157. 


FIELD  HUSBANDRY 


13 


Probably  more  often  these  grains  were  simply  scratched  in  with  a  harrow, 
either  on  newly  cleared  ground  or  on  land  from  which  a  maize  crop  had  been 
harvested.  Dr.  More  wrote  from  Pennsylvania,  1686: 42 

“  The  last  year  I  did  plant  about  twelve  Acres  of  Indian  Corn,  and  when  it  came  of! 
the  Ground,  I  did  only  cause  the  Ground  to  be  Harrowed,  and  upon  that  I  did  sow  both 
Wheat  and  Rye,  at  which  many  Laughed,  saying,  That  I  could  not  expect  any  corn  43 
from  what  I  had  sowed,  the  Land  wanting  more  Labour;  yet  I  had  this  Year  as  good 
Wheat  and  Rye  upon  it,  as  was  to  be  found  in  any  other  place,  and  that  very  Bright 
Corn.” 

Wheat  and  rye  were  sown  both  in  the  fall  and  in  the  spring  in  the  earliest 
settlements.  Wassenaer  44  says  of  New  Netherland  (1628)  : 

“  The  winter  grain  has  turned  out  well  there,  but  the  summer  grain  which  ripened 
before  it  was  half  grown  in  consequence  of  the  excessive  heat,  was  very  light.” 

Van  der  Donck  mentioned  summer  and  winter  sowing  of  wheat,  rye,  and 
barley,45  and  one  of  the  earliest  accounts  of  Pennsylvania  tells  of  summer  and 
winter  wheat.  In  the  latter  colony  a  crop  of  buckwheat  was  secured  from  the 
land  between  the  harvesting  of  the  spring  wheat  and  planting  of  the  winter 
grain.46  In  New  England  spring  or  summer  wheat  seems  to  have  been  the 
chief  variety  sown  for  the  first  half  century  at  least,47  but  after  1660  an 
impetus  was  given  to  the  cultivation  of  winter  wheat  by  the  blast,  which  more 
disastrously  affected  the  summer  grain. 

THE  WHEAT  BLAST. 

The  so-called  “  blast,”  now  recognized  as  the  black  stem-rust,  first  appeared 
in  eastern  Massachusetts  about  1660.  Josselyn,48  with  the  curious  mixture  of 
fact  and  fancy  which  characterized  many  of  the  early  descriptions  of  Amer¬ 
ica,  wrote  in  1663 : 

“  Our  wheat,  i.  e.,  summer  Wheat  many  times  changeth  into  Rye,  and  is  subject  to  be 
blasted,  some  say  with  a  vapour  breaking  out  of  the  earth,  others,  with  a  wind  North¬ 
east  or  North-west,  at  such  time  as  it  flowereth,  others  again  say  it  is  with  lightning.  I 
have  observed,  that  when  a  land  of  Wheat  hath  been  smitten  with  a  blast  at  one  Corner, 
it  hath  infected  the  rest  in  a  weeks  time,  it  begins  at  the  stem  (which  will  be  spotted) 
and  goes  upwards  to  the  ear  making  it  fruitless;  .  .  .  .” 

In  Connecticut  the  blast  was  first  noticed  a  few  years  later.  John  Winthrop, 
jr.,  referred  to  it  in  a  letter  of  1666,  and  in  1668  he  wrote  that  it  had  damaged 
the  wheat  crop  several  years, 

“  generally  through  all  the  plantations,  both  of  ye  Massachusetts  colony,  Plymouth,  & 
this  also  [the  colony  of  Conecticutt]  insomuch  that  the  croppe  of  wheat  hath  failed 
divers  yeares  in  most  plantations.  The  corne  flourished  well  till  it  came  to  be  eared,  and 
the  eares  also  would  at  first  appeare  faire,  and  as  if  full,  but  no  corne  in  them.  There 
have  beene  thousands  of  acres  in  that  maner  every  yeare.  What  the  cause  was, 

42  Myers’s  Narratives,  285. 

43  I.  e.,  grain,  according  to  the  English  usage. 

44  In  Jameson’s  Narratives,  88. 

45  N.  Y.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  2d  series,  I,  157. 

46  Letter  of  Thomas  Paschall,  in  Myers’s  Narratives,  252. 

47  See  Judd,  Hadley ,  95. 

48  Two  Voyages  to  New  England,  in  Mass.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  3d  series,  III,  336-337. 

See  also  Morton,  New  England  Memorial,  309;  Flint,  Hundred  Years  Progress,  in 
Maine  Board  Agric.  19th  Annual  Report,  1874,  p.  114;  Hutchinson,  Massachusetts 
Bay,  I,  485- 


14 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


whether  naturall,  or  a  blasting  fro  heaven  we  know  not.  Our  old  husbandmen  of 
England,  some  of  them  thought  it  a  meldew,  others  that  the  originall  defect  is  in  the 
roote :  the  peas,  barly,  rye  &  India  corne  were  not  touched  with  it,  as  was  generally 
observed.”  49 

The  causes  of  the  blast  were  shrouded  in  mystery,  as  Winthrop’s  specula¬ 
tions  show,  and  remained  so  for  more  than  two  centuries ;  meanwhile,  early 
in  the  eighteenth  century  the  relation  of  barberry  bushes  to  the  blast  had 
been  noted  and  legislation  enacted  for  their  removal.50 

RYE,  BARLEY,  OATS. 

Rye  was  a  strong  competitor  of  wheat  from  the  beginning,  both  in  the  Mid¬ 
dle  Colonies  and  in  New  England.  On  light  sandy  and  gravelly  soils  it  yielded 
better  than  wheat.  Winthrop  tells  of  much  rye  being  sown  with  the  plough 
in  the  Massachusetts  Bay  Colony  in  1636.51  It  was  also  sown  broadcast  on 
burned  land  and  scratched  in  with  a  rake  or  harrow.  In  New  Sweden,  rye 
seems  to  have  taken  precedence  over  wheat,  not  on  account  of  greater  ease 
of  cultivation,  but  because  the  Swedish  colonists  preferred  rye  bread.52  In 
New  England  the  settlers  would  have  preferred  white  bread,  but  the  greater 
difficulty  of  cultivating  wheat  and  the  disastrous  effects  of  the  blast  caused 
wheat  flour  to  become  a  luxury  for  farmers,  and  the  rye  and  Indian  bread  be¬ 
came  the  standard  article  of  consumption. 

Barley  and  oats  were  grown  both  in  New  England  and  the  Middle  Colonies 
from  the  first;  the  former  for  the  production  of  beer,  which  was  the  popular 
drink  even  in  New  England,  until  the  apple  orchards  began  to  bear;  oats  for 
provender  for  horses,  except  in  the  settlements  where  Scotch  immigrants 
predominated,53  as  in  East  New  Jersey.  Oats  seem  not  to  have  been  used  for 
human  food  in  New  England  until  about  1800 54  The  practice  of  sowing 
mixed  crops  was  brought  over  from  Europe.  Peas  and  oats,  and  sometimes 
rye  and  oats,  were  sown  for  cattle  food ;  meslin,  a  mixture  of  wheat  and  rye, 
was  often  used  for  bread.  Field  peas  were  raised  for  human  food  and  not 
as  a  forage  crop.  They  entered  into  agricultural  trade  to  some  extent,  being 
exported  from  the  Connecticut  Valley  to  the  West  Indies  via  Boston.55 

FLAX. 

Flax  had  been  a  common  crop  on  farms  in  England  in  the  sixteenth  century, 
being  a  subject  of  legislative  encouragement,  and  was  cultivated  among  the 
first  crops  in  New  England  as  well  as  in  New  York  and  Pennsylvania.  One  of 
the  earliest  laws  of  Connecticut  (1640)  ordered  every  family  to  raise  half 
a  pound  of  hemp  or  flax.56  The  amount  raised  in  any  particular  settlement 

49  Winthrop  Papers,  in  Mass.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  5th  series,  VIII,  122. 

50  For  a  discussion  of  later  history  of  the  blast  and  its  effect  on  wheat  cultivation  see 

pp.  93,  238. 

51  New  England,  I,  246. 

52  Paschall,  in  Myers’s  Narratives,  252. 

53  Winthrop,  New  England,  I,  104;  Johnson,  Wonder  Working  Providence,  91,  n.  1; 

Trumbull,  N orthampton  (Mass.),  I,  380;  Van  der  Donck,  in  N.  Y.  Hist.  Soc.  Col¬ 
lections,  2d  series,  I,  157;  Scot,  in  N.  J.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  I,  287. 

54  Miller  and  Wells,  History  of  Ryegate,  Vermont,  98. 

55  Van  der  Donck,  in  N.  Y.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  2d  series,  I,  160;  Judd,  Hadley,  355. 

56  Conn.  Colony  Public  Records,  I,  61. 


FIELD  HUSBANDRY 


IS 


depended  a  great  deal  upon  the  ability  of  the  population  to  prepare  the  fiber 
and  spin  and  weave  it.  There  seems  to  have  been  no  particular  difficulty  in 
the  strictly  agricultural  operations  with  flax,  but  getting  it  through  the  proc¬ 
esses  of  household  manufacture  involved  many  difficult  and  disagreeable  tasks.. 
For  the  first  few  years  of  the  new  settlements  the  people  wore  the  clothes  they 
had  brought  with  them,  or  else  traded  for  European  goods.  Only  after  the 
fur  trade  had  failed  and  they  had  settled  down  to  self-sufficient  agriculture 
did  the  cultivation  of  flax  begin  in  earnest.  There  was  probably  considerable 
difference  also  among  the  various  groups  of  settlers  in  their  experience  in 
spinning  flax.  The  wives  of  the  Dutch  settlers  in  New  York,  so  Van  der 
Donck  5T  relates,  did  not  spin  very  much ;  hence  very  little  flax  was  raised  there, 
but  by  1670  the  situation  was  changed,  perhaps  by  the  influx  of  English  set¬ 
tlers  from  New  England,  for  Denton  58  says :  “  they  sowe  store  of  flax,  which 
they  make  every  one  Cloth  of  for  their  own  wearing.  ...”  The  Germans 
who  settled  at  Germantown,  Pennsylvania,  were  expert  linen  weavers  and 
grew  much  flax.59  In  the  Swedish  settlements  on  the  Delaware  flax  was  raised 
for  the  household  manufacture  of  linen,  and  also  in  East  New  Jersey.60 

In  New  England  there  seems  to  have  been  little  cultivation  of  flax  until 
the  introduction  of  the  linen-spinning  wheel  and  the  manufacture  of  linen  by 
the  Scotch-Irish  immigrants  of  the  early  eighteenth  century.  Before  that 
time  cotton  imported  from  the  West  Indies  was  used  to  supplement  the  scanty 
supplies  of  flax  and  wool.61 

Hemp  we  find  occasionally  mentioned.  Being  much  in  demand  for  naval 
stores  in  the  commercial  nations,  it  was  a  subject  for  experiment  in  the  earli¬ 
est  settlements.  In  spite  of  legislative  encouragement,  it  never  proved  a  suc¬ 
cessful  crop  on  the  Atlantic  seaboard. 

TOBACCO. 

Little  tobacco  was  planted  in  New  England,  and  even  then  only  as  a  garden 
crop  for  private  consumption.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  it  was  forbidden  in  the 
Massachusetts  Bay  Colony  in  1629, 62  but  in  New  Netherland  and  New  Sweden 
it  seems  to  have  been  successfully  undertaken  as  a  cash  crop.  In  1644,  Gov¬ 
ernor  Printz,  of  New  Sweden,  reported  exports  of  4,991  pounds  harvested 
in  his  colony,  and  6,920  pounds  in  1647.63  In  New  Netherland  tobacco  was 
used  as  a  preliminary  crop  to  prepare  the  land  for  other  purposes.  Van  Tien- 
hoven  remarked  that  tobacco  “  mellowed  the  soil  ”  and  was  therefore  culti¬ 
vated  on  land  before  winter  grain  was  sown.64  It  shared  with  maize  the  ad¬ 
vantage  of  being  a  crop  which  could  be  planted  without  much  preparation  of 
the  soil. 

57  N.  Y.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections ,  2d  series,  1,  160. 

38  Brief  Description  of  New  York,  18. 

59  Frame,  in  Myers’s  Narratives,  304. 

60  Paschall,  in  Myers’s  Narratives,  252;  Smith,  New  Jersey,  540. 

C1  Judd,  Hadley,  380. 

62  Records,  I,  403. 

63  Myers’s  Narratives,  96,  120. 

04  O'Callaghan,  Documentary  History  of  New  York,  IV,  30. 


16 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


VEGETABLES. 

Beyond  the  growing  of  pumpkins,  squashes  and  beans  in  the  Indian  fash¬ 
ion,  the  cultivation  of  garden  vegetables  was  almost  entirely  lacking.  Garden¬ 
ing  was  too  intensive  an  occupation  for  pioneer  farmers.  But  the  colonists 
did  find  time  to  experiment  freely  with  the  seeds  of  the  European  garden 
vegetables  which  they  brought  over  with  them.  Cabbages,  turnips,  onions, 
radishes,  carrots,  and  parsnips  were  most  frequently  mentioned  in  New  Eng¬ 
land  sources.  To  this  list  the  Dutch  added  beets,  endive,  succory,  finckel, 
sorrel,  dill,  spinach,  parsley,  chevril,  cresses  and  leeks.  An  account  of  1650 
states : 

“  Garden  fruits  succeed  very  well,  yet  are  drier,  sweeter,  and  more  agreeable  than 
in  the  Netherlands;  for  proof  of  which  we  may  easily  instance  musk-melons,  citrons  or 
water-melons,  which  in  New  Netherland  grow  right  in  the  open  fields,  if  the  briars 
and  weeds  are  kept  from  them,  while  in  the  Netherlands  they  require  the  close  care 
of  amateurs,  or  those  who  cultivate  them  for  profit  in  gardens,  and  then  they  are 
neither  so  perfect  by  far,  nor  so  palatable,  as  they  are  in  New  Netherland.”  65 

In  Penn’s  colony,  asparagus,  cauliflower,  and  potatoes,  in  addition  to  the 
New  England  list,  were  mentioned  in  1685.  The  inclusion  of  potatoes  is 
noteworthy.  Although  taken  to  Ireland  from  the  West  Indies  by  way  of 
Virginia  before  1600,  the  American  tubers  were  long  regarded  as  an  exotic 
there  and  in  England,  and  found  a  place  only  in  rich  men’s  gardens.  Penn 
tells  us  that  they  were  planted  by  one  Robert  Turner,  a  rich  merchant,  near 
Philadelphia.  The  introduction  of  potatoes  into  New  England  as  a  food 
product  came  about  a  half  century  later,  with  the  immigration  of  the  Scotch- 
Irish.66 


FRUIT. 

Apples,  pears,  plums,  quinces,  and  cherries  flourished  in  New  England, 
having  been  raised  partly  from  seeds  and  partly  from  trees  brought  over 
from  England.67  Josselyn  68  reported  : 

“  Our  fruit-Trees  prosper  abundantly.  Apple-trees,  Pear-trees,  Quince-trees,  Cherry- 
trees,  Plum-trees,  Barberry-trees.  I  have  observed  with  admiration,  that  the  Kernels 
sown  or  the  Succors  planted  produce  as  fair  &  good  fruit,  without  grafting,  as  the  Tree 
from  whence  they  were  taken :  the  Countrey  is  replenished  with  fair  and  large  Orchards.” 

In  this  section  apples  seem  to  have  been  most  generally  grown  of  all  fruits, 
owing  to  their  hardiness.  Cider  had  attained  popularity  as  a  farm  beverage 
before  1700,  although  it  did  not  displace  beer  for  some  time  after  that  date.69 

Van  der  Donck  saw  apple  and  pear  trees  in  New  Netherland,  some  of  which 
had  been  brought  over  from  Holland  and  others  which  had  been  raised  from 
seeds.  The  Dutch  had  also  quinces  and  cherries.  Danckaerts  70  said  he  had 
never  seen  or  eaten  finer  apples  than  those  which  he  found  at  Bergen,  near 
the  present  Jersey  City. 

65  Jameson’s  Narratives,  296. 

66  Carrier,  Beginnings  of  Agriculture  in  America,  81-87. 

67  Mass.  Bay  Col.  Records,  I,  24;  Winthrop  Papers,  in  Mass.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections ,  3d 

series,  IX,  265. 

68  Mass.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  3d  series,  III,  337. 

69  Judd,  Hadley,  364. 

70  Journal,  156. 


FIELD  HUSBANDRY 


17 


“  One  kind  was  very  large,  fair,  and  of  good  taste,  fifty-six  of  which  only  could  be  put 
in  a  heaped  up  bushel,  that  is,  half  a  bag.  Another  variety,  somewhat  smaller,  but  not 
less  fair  in  appearance,  and  of  a  better  flavor,  my  comrade  was  acquainted  with,  and 
said  they  were  called  the  Double  Paradise.  He  acknowledged  they  were  very  delicate.” 

Peaches  were  grown  much  more  successfully  in  the  Middle  Colonies  than 
in  New  England.  Van  der  Donck  71  wrote  : 

“  If  a  stone  is  put  into  the  earth,  it  will  spring  in  the  same  season,  and  grow  so  rapidly 
as  to  bear  fruit  in  the  fourth  year,  and  the  limbs  are  frequently  broken  by  the  weight 
of  the  peaches,  which  usually  are  very  fine.” 

Danckaerts,72  a  quarter  of  a  century  later,  said  of  the  peaches  on  Long 
Island : 

“  It  is  impossible  to  tell  how  many  peach  trees  we  passed,  all  laden  with  fruit  to 
breaking  down,  and  many  of  them  actually  broken  down.  We  came  to  a  place  surrounded 
with  such  trees  from  which  so  many  had  fallen  off  that  the  ground  could  not  be  dis¬ 
cerned,  and  you  could  not  put  your  foot  down  without  trampling  them ;  and,  notwith¬ 
standing  such  large  quantities  had  fallen  off,  the  trees  still  were  as  full  as  they  could 
bear.  The  hogs  and  other  animals  mostly  feed  on  them.” 

Peaches  had  already  been  introduced  on  the  Delaware  River  before  Penn’s 
arrival.  He  found  them  so  abundant,  “  not  an  Indian  plantation  without  them,” 
that  he  was  uncertain  whether  they  were  not  indigenous.73  “  Peaches,  as  well 
as  wild  plums,  corn,  cherries,  and  grapes  were  distilled  for  brandy,”  says 
Paschall,74  “  and  most  people  have  Stills  of  Copper  for  that  use.”  Attempts 
were  made  to  raise  grapes  for  wine  in  practically  all  the  early  settlements, 
but  with  little  success.  Penn  had  a  fine  vineyard  of  French  vines  75  with  a 
French  vigneron,  but  for  the  small  farmer  struggling  for  a  bare  existence 
such  experiments  were  far  too  costly. 

71  N.  Y.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections ,  2d  series,  I,  153. 

72  Journal,  121. 

73  Myers’s  Narratives,  227. 

74  Ibid.,  253.  _ 

75  Pastorius,  in  Myers’s  Narratives,  398. 


3 


Chapter  II. — Livestock. 

EARLIEST  IMPORTATIONS. 

Livestock  of  various  kinds,  neat  cattle,  sheep,  swine,  goats,  and  horses 
formed  a  part  of  the  initial  equipment  of  all  the  earliest  settlements  except 
the  temporary  factories  or  trading  posts.  At  the  beginning  there  was  a  pitiful 
scarcity  of  stock  in  some  of  the  settlements.  Europe  was  the  only  source  of 
supply  of  the  original  breeding-stock,  for  the  Indians  had  no  domestic  animals 
except  their  dogs.  The  losses  on  the  ocean  voyage  seem  to  have  been  large. 
Capt.  John  Smith 1  related  that  of  200  cattle  brought  over  by  Governor 
Winthrop  for  the  Massachusetts  Bay  Colony  on  one  voyage  70  died  on  the 
way.  When  occasionally  a  ship  arrived  without  losses  at  sea  the  fact  was  noted 
as  unusual.2  When  the  animals  finally  arrived  it  was  extremely  difficult  to 
provide  adequate  forage  and  shelter  and  to  protect  them  against  the  wolves. 
In  the  face  of  such  difficulties  it  was  a  noteworthy  accomplishment  of  New 
England  and  the  Middle  Colonies  in  the  seventeenth  century  to  have  become 
not  only  independent  of  outside  sources  of  supply,  but  even  to  have  developed 
a  surplus  of  cattle,  horses,  and  meat  products  for  export. 

As  would  naturally  be  expected,  some  settlements  were  from  the  first 
better  provided  than  others.  The  Plymouth  colonists  managed  to  exist  three 
years  before  they  received  any  neat  cattle,  and  even  in  1627  they  had  neither 
horses  nor  sheep.3  The  Massachusetts  Bay  Company,  with  its  larger  resources, 
was  able  to  equip  its  settlers  more  adequately.  In  the  very  first  year  30  cows 
and  12  mares,  besides  a  number  of  swine  and  goats  were  sent  over,4  and  in 
the  years  1630  to  1633  livestock  of  various  kinds  arrived  on  almost  every  ship. 
The  settlements  farther  north  on  the  New  England  coast  must  also  have  been 
well  stocked.  Although  we  have  no  records  of  the  original  importations,  an 
inventory  taken  at  Mason’s  plantation  on  the  Piscataqua  River  in  1635  shows 
58  cattle,  92  sheep  and  lambs,  27  goats,  64  swine,  and  22  horses,  mares,  and 
colts.5  At  Trelawny’s  plantation,  near  the  present  site  of  Portland,  Maine, 
there  were  in  1648,  57  cattle,  18  goats,  and  52  swine.6  Dutch  settlers  on  Man¬ 
hattan  brought  with  them  in  1625,  103  head  of  livestock,  including  stallions, 
mares,  bulls,  cows,  and  sheep.7  The  Swedish  settlements  on  the  Delaware 
were,  like  the  Plymouth  colony,  miserably  provided,  for  agriculture.  Governor 
Printz  reported  in  1647  that  there  were  in  all  only  25  head  of  cattle,  and 
most  of  these  had  been  purchased  from  neighboring  colonies.8 

1  Mass.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections ,  3d  series,  III,  40;  see  also  The  Planter’s  Plea,  in  Force, 

Tracts,  II,  43. 

2  Winthrop,  New  England,  I,  192. 

3  Bradford,  Plymouth  Plantation,  166,  217. 

4  Higginson,  in  Young’s  Chronicles,  216. 

5  N.  H.  State  Papers,  I,  115.  The  cattle  had  been  imported  from  Denmark.  (See  p.  24.) 

6  Willis,  in  Maine  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  1st  series,  I,  228. 

7  Wassenaer,  in  Jameson’s  Narratives,  79. 

8  Myers’s  Narratives ,  124. 

18 


LIVESTOCK 


19 


THE  FORAGE  PROBLEM— NATIVE  GRASSES 

UNSATISFACTORY. 

A  condition  of  prime  importance  for  the  successful  raising  of  livestock 
is  of  course  an  abundant  supply  of  nutritive  forage  plants.  In  this  respect 
the  North  American  continent  was  strikingly  deficient.  The  Indians  of  the 
region  kept  no  herbivorous  domestic  animals  and  hence  had  developed  no 
forage  plants.  Consequently  our  important  hay  and  pasture  plants,  timothy, 
Kentucky  bluegrass,  and  the  red  and  white  clovers,  were,  like  our  domestic 
animals,  imported  from  Europe.  The  first  pastures  were  the  woods,  where 
the  underbrush  had  been  destroyed  by  the  Indian  burnings,  and  the  natural 
openings  or  clearings  in  the  lowlands  along  the  banks  of  streams.  There 
were  found  two  chief  kinds  of  forage  plants  ;  (i)  the  wild  rye  ( Elymus  sp.), 
the  common  grass  along  the  Atlantic  coast  from  Virginia  northward,  and 
(2)  the  broom  straw  ( Andropogon  Sp.),  which  was  the  dominant  grass  in 
the  Middle  Colonies  but  was  also  found  in  New  England. 

At  first  acquaintance  these  grasses  looked  promising ;  they  grew  high  and 
thick.  “  Manhigh,”  “  as  high  as  my  head,”  “  thicke  and  long,  as  high  as  a 
man’s  middle ;  some  as  high  as  the  shoulders,  so  that  a  good  mower  may  cut 
three  loads  in  a  day.”  9  But  it  is  remarkable  how  uniformly  writers  qualify 
their  statements  about  the  native  grasses  and  admit  that  although  the  cattle 
ate  them  freely  and  got  along  well  enough  during  the  summer,  the  proportion 
of  roughage  to  nutriment  was  so  large  that  the  hay  was  apt  to  be  insufficient 
for  winter.  Capt.  John  Smith  noted  this  fact  and  warned  the  New  England 
planters  to  clear  land  for  pasture  as  soon  as  possible.  He  wrote : 

“  There  is  grasse  plenty,  though  very  long  and  thicke  stalked,  which  being  neither 
mowne  nor  eaten,  is  very  ranke,  yet  all  their  cattell  like  and  prosper  well  therewith,  but 
indeed  it  is  weeds,  herbs,  and  grasse  growing  together,  which  although  they  be  good 
and  sweet  in  the  Summer,  they  will  deceive  your  cattell  in  winter ;  therefore  be  carefull 
in  the  Spring  to  mow  the  swamps,  and  the  low  Hands  of  Auguan,  where  you  may  have 
harsh  sheare-grasse  enough  to  make  hay  of,  till  you  can  cleare  ground  to  make  pasture, 
which  will  beare  as  good  grasse  as  can  grow  any  where,  as  now  it  doth  in  Virginia ; 
and  unlesse  you  make  this  provision,  if  there  come  an  extraordinary  winter,  you  will 
lose  many  of  them  and  hazard  the  rest,  especially  if  you  bring  them  in  the  latter  end 
of  Summer,  or  before  the  grasse  bee  growne  in  the  Spring,  comming  weake  from 
Sea.”  10 

We  have  similar  testimony  from  the  Middle  Colonies.  De  Rasieres,  writing 
in  1628,  said  of  Manhattan : 

“  The  grass  is  good  in  the  forest  and  valleys,  but  when  made  into  hay,  is  not  so  nutri¬ 
tious  for  cattle  as  here  [i.  e.,  in  Holland],  in  consequence  of  its  wild  state,  but  it  yearly 
improves  by  cultivation.” *  11 

Thomas  Budd  said  of  the  region  on  either  side  of  the  Delaware  River : 12 

“In  the  Woods  groweth  plentifully  a  course  sort  of  Grass,  which  is  so  proving  that 
it  soon  makes  the  Cattel  and  Horses  fat  in  the  Summer,  but  the  Huy  being  course,  which 
is  chiefly  gotten  on  the  fresh  Marshes,  the  Cattel  loseth  their  Flesh  in  the  Winter,  and 
become  very  poor,  except  we  give  them  Corn  ;....” 

9Josselyn,  in  Mass.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  3d  series,  III,  240;  Scot,  in  N.  J.  Hist.  Soc. 

Collections,  I,  295;  Wood,  New  England’s  Prospect  (Prince  ed.),  12. 

10  In  Mass.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  3d  series,  III,  37. 

11  In  Jameson’s  Narratives,  104. 

12  Good  Order  Established  in  Penn,  and  N.  J.  (1685),  p.  34. 


20 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


The  lack  of  really  good  hay  and  pasture  is  shown  by  the  high  regard  in 
which  the  coarse  reeds  and  sedges  of  the  fresh  and  salt  water  marshes  were 
held.  Says  Temple,13  the  historian  of  Whately,  Massachusetts : 

“  It  was  considered  scarcely  desirable  or  safe  to  form  a  Plantation  where  there  was 
not  plenty  of  ‘  fresh  marsh  ’ — what  we  should  call  open  swamp.  And  so,  when  the  west 
side  people  petitioned  for  a  new  town,  the  Hadley  Committee,  in  their  answer  to  the 
General  Court,  gave  as  one  of  the  strongest  reasons  against  the  separation,  that  the 
tract  west  of  the  river  ‘  does  not  afford  boggy  meadow  or  such  like,  that  men  can  live 
upon;  but  their  subsistence  must  be  from  their  Home  lots  and  intervals.” 

INTRODUCTION  OF  ENGLISH  GRASSES. 

As  long  as  the  livestock  had  to  rely  on  native  grasses  they  were  in  danger 
of  starvation.  Drought,  which  was  not  infrequent,  would  so  reduce  the  forage 
as  to  destroy  whole  herds.  Cattle  were  at  times  slaughtered  to  save  them  from 
death  by  hunger.14  It  was  not  long,  however,  before  the  English  grasses  were 
brought  in.  They  spread  rapidly  and  in  a  few  generations  were  so  common 
as  to  be  considered  indigenous.  Their  introduction  was  probably  as  much  the 
result  of  accident  as  of  design,  by  the  importation  of  forage  to  feed  the  animals 
on  shipboard.  As  early  as  1665  “  English  grass,”  a  term  which  regularly  in¬ 
cluded  bluegrass  and  white  clover,  was  mentioned  in  an  official  report  on 
Rhode  Island.15  In  1663  Josselyn  says  of  New  England:  “Our  English 
clover  grass  sowen  thrives  very  well.”  16  Denton,17  in  1670,  speaks  of  Long 
Island  producing  “  excellent  English  grass,  the  seed  of  which  was  brought 
out  of  England,  which  they  sometimes  mow  twice  a  year.”  A  few  years  later 
Danckaerts  18  saw  in  the  same  locality  fields  covered  with  clover  in  blossom 
“  which  diffused  a  sweet  odor  in  the  air  for  a  great  distance.”  In  the  Pennsyl¬ 
vania  and  New  Jersey  settlements  we  find  a  number  of  references  to  English 
grass,  including  specific  references  to  clover,  in  the  first  years  of  the  English 
settlements  there.  It  is  evident  that  sometimes  the  seeding  was  intentional. 
William  Penn  describes  a  successful  experiment  in  sowing  English  grass  seed 
in  1685  and  tells  us  also  that  Robert  Turner,  a  wealthy  merchant-planter, 
sowed  “  great  and  small  clover.”  19  Budd  20  wrote  that  mutton  throve  well  on 
the  natural  grass,  adding — 

“  but  if  we  sprinkle  a  little  English  Hay-Seed  on  the  Land  without  Plowing,  and  then 
feed  Sheep  on  it,  in  a  little  time  it  will  so  encrease,  that  it  will  cover  the  Land  with 
English  Grass,  like  unto  our  Pastures  in  England,  provided  the  Land  be  good.” 

That  the  seeding  was  occasionally  accidental  is  shown  by  such  a  statement 
as  the  following  regarding  East  New  Jersey: 21 

“  the  ground  all  over  brings  forth  good  English  grass  naturally  after  it  is  ploughed.”  “  As 
soon  as  any  of  the  land  here  comes  to  be  cultivated,  it  overruns  with  small  Clover-grass, 
by  the  pasturage  and  dunging  of  cattle,  and  so  supplants  the  naturall  grass  and  herbs, 
notwithstanding  of  their  quick  and  strong  growth.” 

13  Temple,  Whately,  13. 

14  Green,  Hist.  Address  at  Groton  (1876),  p.  10. 

15  Rhode  Island  Colonial  Records,  II,  129. 

16  In  Mass.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  3d  series,  III,  336. 

17  Brief  Description  of  New  York,  5. 

18  Journal  (1679),  p.  131. 

19  Further  Account  of  Penn.,  in  Myers’s  Narratives,  264,  269. 

20  Good  Order  Established  in  Penn,  and  N.  J.  (1685),  p.  37. 

21  Scot,  in  N.  J.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  I,  291,  295. 


LIVESTOCK 


21 


The  seed  used,  as  one  of  the  above  quotations  indicates,  was  unwinnowed 
chaff  gathered  from  the  hay  mows  or  around  the  hay  stacks,  consequently 
there  could  be  little  care  in  the  selection  of  hay  plants,  and  the  resulting  pas¬ 
turage  contained  an  abundance  of  old-world  weeds.  But  even  so  it  was  greatly 
superior  to  the  forage  afforded  by  the  native  American  grasses.22 

MANAGEMENT  AND  CARE  OF  LIVESTOCK. 

One  of  the  necessities  of  a  system  of  mixed  husbandry  such  as  prevailed 
in  all  the  earliest  settlements  was  the  protection  of  growing  crops  from  live¬ 
stock.  Inclosures  or  fences  of  some  kind  were  obviously  needed,  but  fencing, 
was  a  labor-consuming  process  and  in  many  of  the  settlements  the  constant 
energies  of  all  the  labor  force  were  necessary  to  clear  the  land,  put  in  crops 
and  provide  shelter.  In  the  Middle  Colonies,  where  settlements  were  gener¬ 
ally  made  by  individuals  without,  at  first,  any  group  cooperation,  the  problem 
was  one  for  each  farmer  to  work  out  as  best  he  could.  But  in  New  England 
and  in  the  towns  established  by  New  Englanders  on  Long  Island,  in  West¬ 
chester  County,  New  York,  and  in  northern  New  Jersey  the  method  of  com¬ 
munity  settlement  made  possible  a  system  of  common  pasturage.  Among  the 
Dutch  of  New  Netherland  common  pasturage  seems  to  have  been  a  general 
institution  even  before  the  English  conquest,23  and  after  that  event  it  was 
definitely  recognized  in  the  Duke  of  York  laws.24  Governor  Nicolls  said  in  an 
official  report  (ca.  1669)  : 25  “  .  .  .  .  The  feed  of  Cattell  is  free  in  common- 
age  to  all  Towneships,  The  Lots  of  Meadow  or  Corne  Ground  are  peculiar  to 
each  Planter.” 

The  fullest  development  of  the  system  of  common  fields  and  common 
fences  was  of  course  found  in  New  England.26  The  tillage  and  mowing  land 
of  the  community  was  laid  out  in  common  fields,  which  were  surrounded  by 
common  fences.  The  fence,  of  posts  and  rails  with  a  ditch  before  it,  was 
constructed  and  kept  in  repair  by  the  holders  of  allotments  within  the  fields, 
each  man  being  responsible  for  a  certain  length  of  fence  in  proportion  to 
the  extent  of  his  allotment.  It  ought  to  be  noted  here  that  although  tillage 
was  carried  on  in  a  common  field  it  was  not  tillage  in  common.  Every  settler 
cultivated  his  own  allotment ;  he  was,  however,  under  restriction  as  to  choice 
of  crops  and  date  of  harvest. 

While  the  crops  were  on  the  ground,  from  early  spring  until  after  harvest, 
the  fields  were  closed  to  grazing  and  the  livestock  were  pastured  outside  of  the 
village  in  care  of  the  village  shepherds,  cowherds,  swineherds,  and  goatherds. 
The  young  stock,  the  sheep,  and  the  swine  were  pastured  in  remote  uncleared 
or  partially  cleared  tracts  the  “  town  commons  ”  ;  the  working  oxen,  horses, 
and  milch  cows  on  land  nearer  the  village,  so  that  they  could  be  driven  back 
and  forth  daily. 

22  In  the  preparation  of  this  section  the  author  has  drawn  freely  from  Carrier,  Beginnings 

of  Agriculture  in  America ,  and  also  from  Carrier  and  Bort,  History  of  Kentucky 
Blue  grass  and  White  Clover  in  the  United  States ,  in  Journal  of  Am.  Soc.,  Agronomy, 
VIII  (1916),  pp.  256-266. 

23  Elting,  in  J.  H.  U.,  Studies,  IV,  No.  1  (1886),  pp.  24,  41. 

24  Reprinted  in  N.  Y.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  1st  series,  I,  307  et  seq.  See  especially 

327-331. 

25  In  O’Callaghan,  Documentary  History  of  New  York,  I,  87. 

26  See  pp.  49  et  seq. 


22 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


The  sheep  were  often  pastured  separately  in  care  of  a  shepherd  who  re¬ 
mained  with  them  for  the  whole  grazing  season,  folding  them  at  night  by  the 
use  of  movable  pens.27  Swine  were  the  most  troublesome  of  all  livestock,  as 
the  frequency  of  the  legislative  attempts  to  control  them  testifies.  They  were 
pastured  at  a  great  distance  from  the  growing  crops  ;  in  New  Haven  (1641)  23 
it  was  ordered  that  all  that  have  hogs  should  pasture  them  5  miles  from  the 
plantation,  “  and  haunt  them  forth  abroad,  nevertheless  everyone  is  to  endeavor 
to  secure  their  corn  by  sufficient  fences.”  All  swine  which  roamed  abroad  not 
in  charge  of  a  herdsman  were  to  be  ringed,  and  during  the  season  when  the 
crops  were  on  the  ground  were  in  addition  to  wear  a  wooden  yoke  to  prevent 
rooting.29  The  constant  reiteration  of  such  provisions  and  the  assessment  of 
damages  in  town  courts  against  the  owners  of  unruly  swine  show  such  pre¬ 
cautions  to  have  been  often  disregarded. 

In  order  to  facilitate  the  work  of  the  herdsmen,  the  common  pastures  were 
often  situated  on  an  island  or  on  a  peninsula  where  the  sea  acted  as  a  fence  to 
keep  the  stock  from  straying.  The  islands  in  Boston  Harbor  were  utilized 
as  pastures;  so  also  Staten  Island  and  Coney  Island  near  New  York. 

DUTIES  OF  THE  COWHERD. 

The  duties  of  the  cowherd,  the  picturesque  official  who  went  through  the 
village  street  every  morning  sounding  his  horn  and  gathering  his  charges  and 
returning  with  them  in  the  evening,  are  set  forth  in  many  of  the  ancient 
records.  For  example,  the  following  is  the  agreement  with  a  herdsman  in 
Ipswich,  Massachusetts,  1661. 30 

“  Haniel  Bos  worth  is  to  keep  the  herd  of  cows  on  the  north  side  of  the  river,  from  the 
1st  of  May  to  the  20th  of  October.  He  is  to  go  out  with  them  half  an  hour  after  sun¬ 
rise  and  to  bring  them  home  a  little  before  sun-set,  at  13  s.  a  week,  ‘  a  peck  of  corn  a 
head  at  their  going  out,  one  pound  of  butter  or  half  peck  of  wheat  in  June,  and  the  rest 
of  his  pay  at  the  end  of  his  time,  whereof  half  to  be  paid  in  wheat  or  malt ;  the  pay  to  be 
brought  to  his  house  within  six  days  after  demanded,  or  else  to  forfeit  6d.  a  head 
more.’  ‘Agreed  with  Henry  Osborn  to  join  Bosworth  to  keep  the  cows  on  the  same 
terms.  One  of  them  to  take  the  cows  in  Scott’s  Lane  and  to  blow  a  horn  at  the  meeting¬ 
house  green  in  the  morning.’  ” 

OPENING  THE  MEADOWS— STINTED  COMMON. 

In  the  fall  after  harvest,  on  a  day  fixed  by  the  town  authorities,  the  barriers 
were  taken  down  and  the  village  cattle  were  allowed  to  pasture  on  the  stubble. 
This  yearly  “  opening  of  the  meadows  ”  was  an  event  in  the  life  of  the  vil¬ 
lage.31  Such  pasturage  was  regarded  as  especially  valuable  in  preparing  the 
cattle  for  the  long  winters  and  the  rights  of  the  “  proprietors  ”  to  enter  their 
cattle  were  jealously  guarded.  The  common  was  “  stinted,”  that  is,  an  order 
was  passed  by  the  town  authorities  fixing  the  number  of  livestock  of  various 
kinds  which  might  be  introduced,  each  owner’s  allotment  varying  according 

27  Temple  and  Sheldon,  N  orthheld ,  281 ;  Judd,  Hadley,  102. 

28  New  Haven  Colony  Records,  52, 

29  See  Dedham  Town  Records,  III,  6. 

30  Felt,  Ipswich,  44. 

31  See  the  description  in  Sheldon’s  Common  Field  of  Deerfield.  In  Pocumtuck  Valley 

Memorial  Association,  Hist,  and  Proceedings,  V,  250. 


LIVESTOCK 


23 


to  the  acreage  of  the  field  which  he  had  tilled  or  according  to  the  value  of 
the  feed  remaining  on  his  land.  Thus  in  New  Haven  it  was  ordered  (1642), 
that  the  Neck  should  be  a  stinted  common  for  cattle  and  the  settlers  were 
allowed  to  enter  animals  in  proportion  to  their  holdings  in  the  field,  according 
to  the  following  ratio:  12  acres  to  a  horse.  6  acres  to  an  ox,  3  acres  for  a 
young  steer  not  over  2  years  old  and  2  acres  for  a  calf.32  The  method  of 
assigning  rights  in  the  common  field  at  Deerfield  (Mass.),  is  described  as 
follows : 33 

“  The  unit  for  a  right  was  an  ox,  and  other  animals  were  graded  by  that  standard. 
The  grading  varied  from  season  to  season,  according  to  the  whim  or  judgment  pre¬ 
vailing  at  the  meeting  where  values  were  fixed. 

“  As  a  general  rule  a  cow  was  considered  equal  to  an  ox  and  counted  one  right.  Three 
three-year-olds  equaled  two  rights,  two  two-year-olds  one  right,  and  three  calves  or  five 
sheep  one  right.  Horses  appear  to  have  been  considered  undesirable  and  their  presence 
was  not  encouraged.  Sometimes  they  were  let  in  on  one  right  but  oftener  were  charged 
three  and  sometimes  five  rights.  Some  years  they  were  ruled  out  entirely,  and  no  horse 
was  admitted  on  a  right  that  was  bought.” 

In  Dorchester,  Massachusetts,  there  were  120  “cow  rights  ”  in  a  common 
pasture  of  480  acres ;  5  goats,  or  10  kids,  or  2  yearlings,  or  4  calves  or  1 
horse,  or  1  ox  were  accounted  equal  to  1  cow.34 

BRANDS  AND  EARMARKS. 

The  ownership  of  animals  in  the  common  herds  was  established  by  a  sys¬ 
tem  of  brands  or  earmarks  which  were  registered  with  the  town  authorities 
in  New  England  and  with  the  county  clerks  in  the  Middle  Colonies.  In  1664 
we  find  the  general  court  of  the  Connecticut  Colony  passing  the  following 
law : 35 

“  For  the  preuenting  of  differences  that  may  arise  in  the  owneing  of  Cattle  that  be 
lost  or  stree  away,  It  is  Ordered,  that  the  owners  of  any  Catle  within  these  Plantations 
shall  earemarke  or  brand  all  their  Cattle  and  swyne  that  are  aboue  halfe  a  yeare  old 
(except  horsses)  and  that  they  cause  their  seuerall  marks  to  be  registered  in  the  Towne 
booke ;  and  whatsoeuer  cattle  shall  be  found  vnmarked  after  the  first  of  May  next 
shall  forfeit  5  s.  a  head,  whereof  2  s.  vid.  to  him  that  discouers  yt,  and  the  other  to  the 
Country.” 


THE  CONTROL  OF  BREEDING. 

When  the  stock  ran  in  common  herds  any  attempt  on  the  part  of  an  individ¬ 
ual  owner  to  improve  his  particular  group  of  animals  by  selection  of  males 
for  breeding  was  of  course  impossible.  For  the  control  of  breeding  com¬ 
munal  action  was  necessary.  It  is  a  tribute  to  the  intelligence  and  decision  of 
the  New  England  colonists  that  in  a  period  when  so  little  attention  was  paid 
anywhere  to  stock  breeding  they  took  measures  to  raise  the  standards  of 
their  flocks  and  herds.  The  town  bull  is  a  well-known  feature  of  early  colo- 


32  New  Haven  Colony  Records,  82. 

33  In  Pocomtuck  Valley  Memorial  Association,  History  and  Proceedings,  V,  249. 

34  Dorchester  Town  Records,  23. 

85  Conn.  Col.  Pub.  Rec.,  I,  118  (1636-65).  Reproductions  of  earmarks  are  given  in  the 
Plymouth  Town  Records,  I,  1,  in  Chester  (Penn.)  Court  Records  (1684),  reprinted 
in  Smith’s  Delaware  County,  Penn.  151,  and  for  Cape  May  County,  New  Jersey,  in 
Penn.  Magazine  of  History,  XV,  (1891-1892),  370. 


24 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


nial  economy.  Various  townsmen  were  appointed  to  keep  a  bull  and  the 
price  of  its  service  was  fixed  by  law.36 

It  is  important  to  note  that  in  some  towns  the  selection  of  the  bull  calves 
which  were  to  be  raised  as  town  bulls  was  carefully  attended  to,  evidently  for 
the  purpose  of  securing  the  best  possible  breeding  stock.  As  early  as  1639 
the  Town  of  Hartford  37  ordered  that  a  committee  of  two  settlers 

“  shall  view  such  Bull  Calfs  as  they  shall'  thinck  ffitt  to  bee  kept  for  bulls  and  shall 
give  notis  to  [the]  Townsmen  who  shall  Agree  wth  the  ptyes  as  they  shall  see  best: 

to  haue  them  kept  for  bulls.” 

% 

In  the  Windsor,  Connecticut,  town  records  38  we  read  (1653)  that  two  men 
were  directed  “  to  appoint  what  calves  shall  be  reared  for  bulls  .  .  .  .  ”  A 
committee  to  view  bull  calves  was  appointed  in  Guilford,  Connecticut,  in 
i649.39  Care  for  breeding  was  not  confined  to  cattle.  In  1673  the  general 
court  of  the  Connecticut  Colony  ordered  that  two  or  three  men  in  each  planta¬ 
tion  should  keep  rams  and  none  should  be  permitted  to  run  at  large  with  the 
ewes.40  The  breeding  of  horses  early  became  an  important  branch  of  the 
colonial  livestock  industry  because  of  the  lucrative  trade  in  these  animals  with 
the  West  Indies ;  hence  it  is  not  surprising  to  find  legislative  action  tending 
to  improve  the  breed.  In  Massachusetts  Bay  Colony  it  was  forbidden  in  1668 
to  let  any  stallions  over  2  years  old  under  14  hands  high  run  at  large  in  com¬ 
mons  and  woods,41  and  in  Connecticut  it  was  required  (1674)  that  all  horses 
over  2  years  old  under  13  hands  high  should  be  gelded.42 

THE  NEAT  CATTLE— THEIR  VARIED  ANCESTRY. 

The  colonial  cattle  had  a  varied  ancestry.  It  seems  certain  that  the  first 
cattle  of  the  Massachusetts  Bay  Colony  came  mostly  from  Devonshire  and 
were  the  ancestors  of  the  present  Devons.43  To  this  strain  there  was  soon 
added  an  important  mixture  by  the  importation  of  Danish  cattle  in  1633  to 
Capt.  John  Mason’s  plantation,  on  the  Piscataqua  River,  New  Hampshire. 
They  were  large  yellow  animals  brought  over  to  be  used  principally  as  draft 
animals  in  Mason’s  lumbering  operations.  They  increased  rapidly  and  at 
Mason’s  death  in  1635  amounted  to  perhaps  300  in  all.  Some  of  Mason’s 
creditors  seized  the  best  of  them  and  they  were  dispersed  among  the  small 
farmers  along  the  river.  A  herd  of  100  head  were  driven  overland  to  Boston, 
where  they  were  sold  in  1640.44  The  so-called  “  native  ”  or  “  red  ”  cattle  of 
New  England  included  also  admixture  of  Dutch  stock,  and  of  black  cattle 
from  the  Spanish  West  Indies.45  The  Dutch  cattle  brought  to  New  Nether- 


36  See  Dorchester  Records  (1633),  in  4th  Report  Boston  Records,  33. 

87  Conn.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  VI,  29. 

38  Book  I,  15,  quoted  in  Stiles,  Ancient  Windsor,  I,  175. 

39  Steiner,  Guilford,  242. 

40  Public  Records,  II,  197. 

41  Records,  IV,  pt.  2,  367. 

42  Public  Records,  II,  244.  (This  act  was  repealed  in  1726,  Ibid.,  VII,  31.) 

43  Thompson,  MS.  History  of  Stock  Raising,  ch.  II.  This  conclusion  is  supported  by 

investigations  of  the  ports  from  which  the  ships  bringing  cattle  sailed.  See  also 
Potter,  Native  Cattle  of  New  Hampshire  in  N.  H.  State  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions 
(1854),  232. 

44  See  Dean,  Capt.  John  Mason,  87;  Potter,  op.  cit.,  227-230;  Belknap,  New  Hampshire, 

III,  142. 

45  Potter,  Dative  Cattle  of  New  Hampshire  in  N.  H.  State  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions 

(1854),  232.  Winthrop  tells  (1635)  of  the  importation  of  63  heifers  from  Holland. 
New  England,  I,  191. 


LIVESTOCK 


25 


land  were  soon  crossed  with  English  stock  brought  from  New  England.  They 
seemed  to  be  more  hardy  than  the  Holland  cattle  and  consequently  endured 
better  the  scanty  fodder  and  lack  of  shelter.46  In  Pennsylvania  the  cattle  of 
the  English  settlers  were  mostly  purchased  from  the  Swedes  on  the  Delaware, 
the  descendants  of  a  few  animals  which  the  latter  had  brought  from  Sweden 
with  intermixture  of  importations  from  New  Netherland  and  New  Eng¬ 
land.47  It  appears,  therefore,  that  the  colonial  cattle  were  derived  from  four 
main  stocks — English,  Danish,  Dutch  and  Swedish — which  by  the  process 
of  intercolonial  trade  soon  became  indistinguishably  blended. 

CARE  OF  LIVESTOCK— SHELTER  AND  WINTER  FEED 

Livestock  were  given  little  winter  shelter  in  any  of  the  colonies.  Such  had 
been  the  practice  in  England  and  there  are  many  indications  that  the  earliest 
settlers  did  not  realize  how  much  more  severe  the  winters  were  apt  to  be  in 
the  new  country;  and,  besides,  there  was  again  the  scarcity  of  labor;  it  was 
perhaps  a  choice  between  providing  adequate  shelter  for  themselves  or  for 
their  cattle.  Winthrop  records,  December  26,  1630 :  “  Many  of  our  cows 
and  goats  were  forced  to  be  still  abroad  for  want  of  houses.”  48  And  Wood,49 
in  1634,  wrote  of  New  England: 

“  There  is  no  want  of  Winter  fodder  till  December,  at  which  time  men  beginne  to  house 
their  milch-cattle  and  Calves.  Some,  notwithstanding  the  cold  of  the  Winter,  have 
their  young  Cattle  without  doores,  giving  them  meate  at  morning  and  evening.” 

For  winter  feed  the  scanty  supply  of  hay  was  occasionally  supplemented 
by  a  little  wheat  straw  or  a  few  corn  husks.  Governor  Winthrop 50  remarked 
in  his  Description  of  Maize: 

“  The  Stalks  of  this  Corn,  cut  up  before  too  much  dryed,  and  so  laid  up,  are  good 
Winter-fodder  for  Cattle.  But  they  usually  leave  them  on  the  Ground  for  the  Cattle 
to  feed  on.  The  Husks  about  the  Ear  are  good  Fodder,  given  for  change  sometimes 
after  Hay.” 

With  such  care  the  New  England  cattle  early  acquired  through  a  vigorous 
process  of  natural  selection  a  reputation  for  tough  vitality.  In  the  Represen¬ 
tation  of  New  Netherland  (1650), 51  the  English  cattle,  i.  e.,  those  brought 
from  New  England,  are  contrasted  with  the  more  pampered  Dutch  breed: 

“The  tame  cattle  are  in  size  and  other  respects  about  the  same  as  in  the  Netherlands, 
but  the  English  cattle  and  swine  thrive  and  grow  best,  appearing  to  be  better  suited 
to  the  country  than  those  from  Holland.  They  require,  too,  less  trouble,  expense  and 
attention ;  for  it  is  not  necessary  in  winter  to  look  after  such  as  are  dry,  or  the  swine, 
except  that  in  the  time  of  a  deep  snow  they  should  have  some  attention.  Milch  cows  also 
are  much  less  trouble  than  they  are  in  Holland,  as  most  of  the  time,  if  any  care  be 
requisite,  it  is  only  for  the  purpose  of  giving  them  occasionally  a  little  hay.” 

Van  der  Donck  52  says  of  the  English  cattle  in  the  Dutch  Colony : 

“  They  also  have  English  cattle  in  the  country,  which  are  not  imported  by  the  Nether- 
landers,  but  purchased  from  the  English  in  New-England.  Those  cattle  thrive  as  well 


48  In  Jameson’s  Narratives,  296;  Van  der  Donck,  in  N.  Y.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  2d 
series,  I,  165. 

47  Kalm,  Travels  (1770  ed.),  I,  141. 

48  New  England,  I,  47. 

40  New  England’s  Prospect  (Prince  ed.),  13. 

50  Philosophical  Transactions  of  the  Royal  Society  of  London,  XII  (1678),  1067. 

51  In  Jameson’s  Narratives,  296. 

52  In  N.  Y.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  2d  series,  I,  165. 


26 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


as  the  Holland  cattle,  and  do  not  require  as  much  care  and  provender ;  and,  as  in  England, 
this  breed  will  do  well  unsheltered  whole  winters.  This  breed  of  cattle  do  not  grow 
near  as  large  as  the  Dutch  cattle,  do  not  give  as  much  milk,  and  are  much  cheaper; 
but  they  fat  and  tallow  well.” 


RELATIVE  IMPORTANCE  OF  VARIOUS  KINDS  OF  STOCK. 

Neat  cattle,  including  working  oxen,  beef  cattle  and  dairy  cows  taken  to¬ 
gether,  seem  to  have  been  the  most  important  kind  of  livestock  generally 
throughout  the  colonies,  although  there  developed  at  a  surprisingly  early  date 
certain  regions  where  sheep  were  predominant.  The  tax  lists  of  io  Long 
Island  towns  in  1675  showed  4,293  neat  cattle,  1,564  sheep,  1,344  swine  and 


Table  2. — Neat  cattle,  excluding  oxen  ( bulls /  cows,  heifers,  and  steers,  over  1  year  old). 


[Sources:  O’Callaghan,  Doc.  Hist.  N.  Y.,  II,  439  et  seq. ;  IV,  139  et  seq.;  Boston  Tax  Lists  in 

First  Report  Boston  Records  (1876),  128  et  seq.] 


Long 

Island, 

Dutch 

towns 

(1675). 

Long 

Island, 

English 

towns 

(1675). 

Boston, 

Muddy 

River 

(1687). 

Boston, 

Romney 

Marsh 

(1687). 

Essex 

County 

inven¬ 

tories 

(1635- 

1664). 

Connect¬ 

icut 

inven¬ 

tories 

(1639— 

1648). 

New 

Haven 

inven¬ 

tories. 

Total. 

Total  farms  listed . 

153 

271 

31 

34 

50 

15 

16 

570 

Number  of  farms  re- 

46 

16 

porting  cattle  . 

148 

242 

31 

32 

15 

530 

P.  ct.  of  all  farms  re- 

porting  cattle  . 

97 

89 

IOO 

94 

92 

IOO 

IOO 

93 

Total  neat  cattle  reported 

1,206 

2,366 

195 

344 

287 

75 

150 

4,623 

Average  No.  of  cattle 

10.8 

6.2 

8.7 

per  farm  . . 

8.1 

9-8 

6-3 

5-0 

9-3 

No.  of  farms  reporting : 

8 

1  to  5  cattle . 

58 

77 

14 

7 

19 

9 

192 

6  to  10  cattle . 

49 

95 

13 

12 

l6 

6 

2 

193 

11  to  15  cattle . 

27 

47 

4 

6 

II 

0 

4 

99 

16  to  20  cattle . 

8 

22 

0 

4 

0 

O' 

1 

35 

21  to  25  cattle . 

5 

9 

0 

2 

0 

0 

1 

17 

Over  25  cattle . 

1 

5 

0 

1 

0 

0 

0 

7 

Largest  herd  reported.. 

36 

37 

13 

40 

15 

10 

22 

40 

a  Bulls  were  included  with  oxen  in  the  Long  Island  inventories. 


941  horses.63  In  Muddy  River  (now  Brookline),  which  was  in  1678  a  farm¬ 
ing  section  of  Boston,  the  assessors  reported  215  neat  cattle,  214  sheep,  56 
horses  and  29  swine.  However,  in  another  section  of  the  same  town,  includ¬ 
ing  Romney  Marsh  (now  Chelsea)  and  the  islands  of  Boston  Harbor,  the 
sheep  far  outnumbered  all  other  livestock,  amounting  to  1,544  as  compared 
to  416  neat  cattle,  69  horses,  and  95  swine.54  The  general  preponderance  of 
neat  cattle  is  attested  also  by  the  examination  of  the  inventories  of  estates 
which  were  filed  with  the  wills  of  early  settlers.  In  Essex  County,  Massachu¬ 
setts,65  50  such  inventories  show  381  neat  cattle,  102  sheep,  11  horses,  and 
160  swine.  The  inventories  of  15  Connecticut  settlers  (1639-1648)  56  show 
108  neat  cattle,  88  swine,  16  horses,  and  only  4  sheep.  In  1663  there  were  on 


63  O’Callaghan,  Documentary  History  of  New  York,  II,  439  et  seq.,  and  IV,  139  et  seq. 

64  Boston  tax  lists,  in  First  Report  Boston  Records  (1876),  128  et  seq. 

55  Essex  County  Quarterly  Courts,  Records  and  Files,  I  (1636-1656),  and  Probate 

Records,  County  of  Essex,  I  (1635-1664). 

56  In  Conn.  Col.  Public  Records ,  I,  442  et  seq. 


LIVESTOCK 


27 


no  farms  in  the  settlements  originally  made  by  the  Swedes  on  the  Delaware, 
then  under  Dutch  rule,  200  cows  and  oxen,  20  horses,  80  sheep,  and  several 
thousand  swine.57  While  the  tax  lists  and  inventories  do  not  furnish  suffi¬ 
cient  data  for  trustworthy  generalizations  covering  all  the  northern  colonies, 
nevertheless  the  pictures  which  they  present  of  conditions  in  a  few  typical 
areas  are  deserving  of  close  analysis. 

The  general  accounts  of  agriculture  in  the  early  settlements  uniformly  men¬ 
tioned  neat  cattle  most  prominently  among  livestock.  The  importance  of 
cattle  in  the  life  of  the  early  settlers  is  emphasized  occasionally  in  the  reasons 
given  for  the  formation  of  new  settlements.  We  are  told  that  the  founding  of 
Hartford,  Connecticut,  was  caused  by  the  desire  of  the  farmers  of  eastern 
Massachusetts  for  more  and  better  land  for  pasturing  their  cattle.58  In  Penn¬ 
sylvania  a  similar  cause  for  dispersion  was  present.  Thomas  wrote  in  1698  59 
that  the  people  were  “  obliged  to  go  farther  up  into  the  Countrey,  because  there 
is  the  chiefest  and  best  place  for  their  Stocks.” 

DAIRYING  AND  BEEF  PRODUCTION. 

Dairying  and  raising  of  beef  cattle  for  market  were  generally  not  differ¬ 
entiated.  The  market  for  milk  was  limited  by  the  difficulties  of  transporta¬ 
tion,  and  even  in  the  largest  towns,  such  as  Boston,  cows  were  kept.  Butter 
and  cheese  were  made  on  every  farm,  but  were  not  of  a  high  quality.  Such 
processes  demanded  more  care  and  attention  than  the  ordinary  farmer  could 
then  afford.  Hence  the  city  people  throughout  the  seventeenth  century  and 
until  the  end  of  the  eighteenth  century  imported  at  least  part  of  their  butter  and 
cheese  from  England  and  Ireland.60  The  raising  of  beef  cattle  and  other 
livestock  for  sale  began  very  early.  Farmers  in  the  surrounding  towns  drove 
their  animals  to  the  slaughter-houses  in  Boston,  New  York,  and  Philadelphia 
and  salted  meat  was  shipped  to  the  West  India  Islands.  In  that  region  of 
specialized  farming  there  was  a  constant  demand  for  salted  beef  and  pork 
and  for  horses  as  well.  The  New  England  settlements  until  about  1650  were 
importers  of  livestock,  not  only  from  Europe  but  also  from  the  Southern 
Colonies,  chiefly  from  Virginia.  But  after  the  middle  of  the  seventeenth  cen¬ 
tury  the  New  England  settlements  began  to  have  a  surplus  for  export,  not 
only  of  beef  and  pork,  but  also  horses  and  sheep.61  The  result  of  opening  the 
market  was  the  beginning  of  specialization  in  cattle-raising  in  at  least  one 
region  in  New  England  (Hampshire  County,  Massachusetts,  in  the  Connecti¬ 
cut  Valley).  Grass-fed  cattle  were  driven  to  Boston  from  this  section  soon 
after  its  settlement.62 

“John  Pynchon  sent  cattle  in  the  fall,  from  Springfield  to  Boston,  before  1655;  and 
he  sent  winter-fattened  cattle  in  the  spring  before  1670,  and  many  years  after.  It  is  not 
known  when  the  farmers  of  Northampton,  Hadley  and  Hatfield  began  to  stall-feed 
oxen  for  market.  It  is  manifest  from  the  records  of  Hatfield,  that  a  number  of  cattle 
were  fattened  there  in  the  winter  of  1696-7,  and  that  this  was  not  a  new  business.” 

57  Johnson,  Swedish  Settlements  on  the  Delaware,  II,  667. 

58  Love,  Colonial  Hartford,  116. 

59  Historical  Account,  in  Myers’s  Narratives,  325. 

60  Judd,  Hadley,  376. 

61  The  trade  in  livestock  is  further  discussed  on  p.  44. 

62  Judd,  Hadley,  368. 


28  AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 

SHEEP. 

The  sheep  of  the  colonies  in  the  seventeenth  century  were  derived  from 
England  and  from  Holland.  Sheep  were  more  difficult  to  establish  in  the 
earliest  settlements  than  the  other  kinds  of  livestock.  They  were  particularly 
liable  to  attack  by  wolves,  and  severe  losses  were  sustained  by  exposure  to 
cold  winters  without  shelter.  But  wool  must  be  had,  and  the  colonists,  par¬ 
ticularly  in  New  England,  set  in  motion  the  forces  of  legislation  to  encourage 
its  production.  In  the  Massachusetts  Bay  Colony  the  towns  were  urged  in 
1645  to  take  steps  to  encourage  raising  of  more  sheep;  in  1648  sheep  were 
given  especial  privileges  in  the  common  pastures.  In  1654  the  domestic  supply 
of  wool  was  still  deficient  and  the  exportation  of  sheep  was  restricted  and  the 


Table  3. — Sheep  over  one  year  old. 


[Sources:  O’Callaghan,  Doc.  Hist.  N.  Y.,  II,  439  et  seq.;  IV,  139  et  seq.;  Boston  Tax  Lists  in 

First  Report  Boston  Records  (1876).  128  et  seq.] 


Long 

Island, 

Dutch 

towns. 

Long 

Island, 

English 

towns. 

Boston, 

Muddy 

River. 

Boston, 

Romney 

Marsh. 

Essex 

County 

inven¬ 

tories. 

Connect¬ 

icut 

inven¬ 

tories. 

New 

Haven 

inven¬ 

tories. 

Total. 

Total  farms  listed . 

153 

271 

31 

34 

50 

15 

l6 

570 

Number  of  farms  re- 

porting  sheep  . 

32 

Il6 

13 

30 

15 

I 

6 

213 

Per  cent  of  all  farms  re- 

porting  sheep  . 

21 

43 

42 

88 

30 

6.6 

37 

36 

Total  sheep  reported... 

191 

L473 

214 

L544 

102 

4 

54 

3,582 

Average  sheep  per  farm 

5-9 

12.7 

16.5 

5L5 

6.8 

4.0 

9.0 

16.8 

Number  of  farms  re¬ 
porting: 

68 

1  to  10  sheep . 

27 

2 

7 

13 

1 

4 

122 

11  to  20  sheep . 

5 

29 

9 

9 

2 

0 

1 

55 

21  to  40  sheep . 

0 

16 

2 

9 

0 

0 

1 

28 

41  to  60  sheep . 

0 

1 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

1 

Over  60  sheep . 

0 

2 

0 

5 

0 

0 

0 

7 

Largest  flock  reported. 

16 

81 

40 

370 

16 

4 

24 

370 

slaughter  of  rams  and  wether  lambs  under  2  years  old  was  prohibited.63  In 
the  Connecticut  Colony  sheep  were  exempted  from  taxation,  1666,  and  in 
1670  all  males  over  14  were  required  to  work  one  day  a  year  in  clearing  under¬ 
brush  for  sheep  pasture.64  Rhode  Island  seems  not  to  have  felt  the  need  of 
encouraging  the  sheep-growing  industry,  and  in  fact  this  colony  had  by  1700 
become  the  chief  seat  of  sheep  raising  in  New  England.  In  1665  an  official 
Commission  sent  from  England  reported  of  Rhode  Island :  “  In  this  province 
is  the  best  English  grass  and  the  most  sheep,”  65  and  the  same  testimony  was 
given  at  an  official  inquiry  in  London  in  1676.66  Rhode  Island  was  the  source 
whence  some  of  the  sheep  of  the  Middle  Colonies  were  derived.67 

63  Mass.  Bay  Colony  Records,  II,  105,  251 ;  III,  355,  424. 

64  Conn.  Col.  Public  Records,  II,  34,  139. 

65  Hutchinson  Papers,  II,  416. 

66  See  Weeden,  Early  Rhode  Island,  114. 

67  Budd,  Good  Order  Established  in  Penn,  and  N.  J.  (1685),  p.  40. 


LIVESTOCK 


29 


In  the  Middle  Colonies  sheep  were  not  as  numerous  as  in  New  England. 
Van  der  Donck  wrote  in  1656: 68 

“  Sheep  are  also  kept  in  New  Netherland,  but  not  as  many  as  in  New-England,  where 
the  weaving  business  is  driven,  and  where  much  attention  is  paid  to  sheep,  to  which  our 
Netherlanders  pay  little  attention.  The  sheep  thrive  well,  and  become  fat  enough.  I 
have  seen  mutton  so  exceedingly  fat  there,  that  it  was  too  luscious  and  offensive.  The 
sheep  breed  well,  and  are  healthy.  There  is  also  good  feeding  in  summer,  and  good 
hay  for  the  winter.  But  the  flocks  require  to  be  guarded  and  tended  on  account  of  the 
wolves,  for  which  purpose  men  cannot  be  spared ;  there  is  also  a  more  important  hinder- 
ance  to  the  keeping  of  sheep,  which  are  principally  kept  for  their  wool.  New-Nether- 
lands  throughout  is  a  woody  country,  being  almost  every  where  beset  with  trees,  stumps 
and  brushwood,  wherein  the  sheep  pasture,  and  by  which  they  lose  most  of  their  wool, 
which  by  appearance  does  not  seem  to  be  out,  but  when  sheared  turns  out  light  in  the 
fleeces.” 

Of  sheep  in  early  Pennsylvania  and  New  Jersey  we  have  little  information, 
save  for  the  testimony  of  Budd  (1685)  and  Thomas  (1698),  who  agree  that 
they  were  present  in  considerable  numbers,  were  free  from  many  of  the 
diseases  to  which  they  were  subject  in  England  and  were  remarkably  prolific.69 

DRAFT  ANIMALS— HORSES  AND  OXEN. 

The  horses  of  New  England  were  originally  imported  from  England,  but 
were  soon  supplemented  by  27  Flanders  mares  and  3  stallions  brought  from 
Holland  in  1635.70  In  New  Netherland,  according  to  Van  der  Donck,71  there 
were  both  Dutch  and  English  horses.  The  latter  were  the  lighter  and  used 
for  riding  rather  than  as  draft  animals.  He  continues  : 

“  There  are  Curacoan  and  Arabian  horses  imported  into  the  country,  but  those  breeds 
are  not  very  acceptable,  because  they  do  not  endure  the  cold  weather  of  the  climate  well, 
and  sometimes  die  in  winter.  The  whole  of  this  breed  require  great  care  and  attention 
in  the  winter.  Fine  large  horses  are  bred  in  the  country,  which  live  long  and  are 
seldom  diseased.” 

The  foundation  of  a  good  breed  of  horses  in  Pennsylvania  was  laid  by 
William  Penn,  who  brought  over  3  brood  mares  at  his  first  coming  and  in 
1699  imported  “  the  magnificent  colt,  Tamerlane,  of  the  best  strain  in  Eng¬ 
land.72  Horses  were  used  throughout  the  earliest  settlements  for  riding  and 
to  a  less  extent  as  draft  animals,  either  alone  or  with  oxen.  But  oxen  were 
generally  preferred  for  ploughing  and  other  farm  work.  A  comparison  of  the 
numbers  of  oxen  and  horses  inventoried  in  the  estates  of  Essex  County  set¬ 
tlers  shows  a  predominance  of  the  former  in  the  ratio  of  6  to  1  ;  and  oxen 
are  clearly  predominant  in  1675  in  the  English  towns  on  Long  Island.  In  the 
Dutch  towns  horses  were  the  more  numerous,  but  oxen  were  also  used.  Van 
Tienhoven  73  advised  new  settlers  in  New  Netherland  (1650)  : 

“  Yoke  oxen  for  the  plough,  inasmuch  as  in  new  lands  full  of  roots,  oxen  go  forward 
steadily  under  the  plough,  and  horses  stand  still,  or  with  a  start  break  the  harness 
in  pieces.” 


68  In  N.  Y.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  2d  series,  I,  166. 

69  Budd,  Good  Order  Established  in  Penn,  and  N.  39 ;  Thomas,  in  Myers’s  Narra¬ 

tives,  324. 

70  Winthrop,  New  England,  I,  191. 

71  In  N.  Y.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  2d  series,  I,  165. 

72  Eggleston,  Husbandry  in  Colony  Times,  in  Century  Magazine,  XXVII,  445. 

73  In  O’Callaghan  Documentary  History  of  N.  Y.f  IV,  32. 


30  AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 

They  evidently  took  the  advice,  for  in  1656  Van  der  Donck  74  reported : 
“  Oxen  do  good  service  there,  and  are  not  only  used  by  the  English,  but  by 


Table  4. — Horses  over  one  year  old. 


[Sources:  O’Callaghan,  Doc.  Hist.  N.  Y.,  II,  439  et  seq.;  IV,  139  et  seq.;  Boston  Tax  Lists  in 

First  Report  Boston  Records  (1876),  128  et  seq.] 


Long 

Island, 

Dutch 

towns. 

Long 

Island, 

English 

towns. 

Boston, 

Muddy 

River. 

Boston, 

Romney 

Marsh. 

Essex 

County 

inven¬ 

tories. 

Connect¬ 

icut 

inven¬ 

tories. 

New 

Haven 

inven¬ 

tories. 

Total. 

Total  number  of  farms 
listed  . 

153 

271 

31 

34 

50 

15 

l6 

570 

No.  of  farms  reporting 

8 

horses  . 

128 

230 

30 

27 

6 

II 

440 

Per  cent  of  all  farms 

reporting  horses  .... 

84 

85 

97 

80 

12 

53 

69 

77 

Total  horses  reported. 

379 

562 

56 

69 

11 

16 

39 

1,132 

Average  horses  per  farm 

3-0 

2.4 

1.9 

2.5 

1.8 

2.0 

3-5 

2.5 

Number  of  farms  re¬ 
porting — 

1  horse  . 

19 

102 

13 

6 

4 

3 

I 

148 

2  horses  . 

42 

45 

9 

15 

2 

2 

3 

118 

3  horses  . 

25 

32 

7 

2 

0 

3 

3 

72 

4  horses  . 

22 

24 

1 

1 

0 

0 

1 

49 

5  horses  . 

12 

10 

0 

2 

0 

0 

1 

25 

6  horses  . 

4 

3 

0 

1 

0 

0 

1 

9 

More  than  6  horses 

4 

14 

0 

1 

0 

0 

1 

20 

Largest  no.  reported... 

8 

9 

4 

8 

2 

3 

8 

9 

Table  5. — Oxen,  four  years  old  and  over. 


[Sources:  O’Callaghan,  Doc.  Hist.  N.  Y.,  II,  439  et  seq.;  IV,  139  et  seq.;  Boston  Tax  Lists  in 

First  Report  Boston  Records  (1876),  128  et  seq.] 


Long 

Island, 

Dutch 

towns. 

Long 

Island, 

English 

towns. 

Boston, 

Muddy 

River. 

Boston, 

Romney 

Marsh. 

Essex 

County 

inven¬ 

tories. 

Con¬ 

necticut 

inven¬ 

tories. 

New 

Haven 

inven¬ 

tories. 

Total. 

Total  farms  listed . 

153 

271 

31 

34 

50 

15 

l6 

570 

No.  of  farms  reporting 

36 

oxen  . 

193 

9 

27 

19 

7 

II 

302 

Per  cent  of  all  farms  re- 

porting  oxen  . 

24 

72 

29 

79 

38 

47 

69 

53 

Total  oxen  reported... 

8l 

640 

20 

72 

69 

20 

26 

928 

Average  oxen  per  farm. 

2.2 

3-1 

2.2 

2.7 

3-6 

2.9 

2.4 

3-0 

Number  of  farms  re¬ 
porting — 

1  ox  . 

6 

5 

0 

0 

1 

0 

I 

13 

2  oxen  . 

21 

99 

8 

22 

6 

5 

8 

169 

3  oxen  . 

5 

8 

0 

0 

4 

0 

1 

18 

4  oxen  . 

3 

47 

1 

2 

4 

1 

0 

58 

S  oxen  . 

0 

8 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

8 

6  oxen  . 

I 

14 

0 

2 

3 

1 

1 

22 

Over  6  oxen  . 

0 

12 

0 

I 

1 

0 

0 

14 

Largest  no.  reported... 

6 

12 

4 

8 

10 

6 

6 

12 

some  of  the  Netherlander  also,  to  the  wagon  and  plough.”  In  New  Jersey 
oxen  were  used  for  drawing  carts  and  for  breaking  up  new  land,  but  for  sub- 


74  In  N.  Y.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  2d  series,  I,  166. 


LIVESTOCK 


31 


sequent  ploughing  horses  were  regarded  as  strong  enough.75  In  Pennsylvania, 
William  Penn  76  reported  (1683),  “that  people  Plow  mostly  with  Oxen.” 

Horses  shared  the  general  neglect  which  was  the  portion  of  all  livestock. 
Perhaps  they  fared  even  more  hardly  than  cattle  and  sheep,  because  they  had 
no  food  value.  In  the  Middle  Colonies,  as  well  as  in  New  England,  horses 
were  allowed  to  run  wild  on  the  commons.  In  1671  the  city  records  of  New 
York  contained  numerous  complaints  of  unmarked  horses  and  cattle  running 
wild  in  the  commons  and  woodlands  of  Manhattan.77  Josselyn78  wrote  of 
New  England : 

“  Horses  there  are  numerous,  and  here  and  there  a  good  one,  they  let  them  run  all 
the  year  abroad,  and  in  the  winter  seldom  provide  any  fother  for  them,  (except  it  be 
Magistrates,  great  Masters  and  Troopers  Horses)  which  brings  them  very  low  in  flesh 
till  the  spring,  and  so  crest  fallen,  that  their  crests  never  rise  again.” 

Of  the  Pennsylvania  horses  Budd  79  wrote: 

“  Our  Horses  are  good  serviceable  Horses,  fit  both  for  Draught  and  Saddle,  the 
Planters  will  ride  them  fifty  Miles  a  day,  without  Shoes,  and  some  of  them  are  indif¬ 
ferent  good  shapes;  of  which  many  Ships  are  freighted  yearly  from  New-England 
with  Horses  to  Barbadoes,  Nevis,  and  other  places ;  and  some  Ships  have  also  been 
freighted  out  of  Pennsylvania  and  New-Jersey  with  Horses  to  Barbadoes ;  but  if  we 
had  some  choice  Horses  from  England,  and  did  get  some  of  the  best  of  our  Mares,  and 
keep  them  well  in  the  Winter,  and  in  Pastures  inclosed  in  the  Summer,  to  prevent  there 
going  amongst  other  Horses,  we  might  then  have  a  choice  breed  of  Horses,  which 
would  tend  much  to  the  advantage  of  the  Inhabitants.” 

Horse-raising  for  the  West  India  market  was  early  developed  in  New 
England,  where  the  export  of  horses  began  before  1650.  The  Middle  Colo¬ 
nies  were  also  exporting  horses  in  the  second  half  of  the  seventeenth  century. 

SWINE. 

Swine  seem  to  have  adapted  themselves  to  their  new  environment  with  less 
difficulty  than  any  other  domestic  animal.  The  English  swine  imported  into 
New  England  had  arched  backs,  were  excellent  runners,  and  gave  a  good 
account  of  themselves  in  their  encounters  with  bears,  wolves,  and  rattlesnakes. 
In  the  settlements  near  the  coast  they  fed  on  clams  and  other  shellfish,  and  in 
the  woods  they  found  an  abundant  supply  of  acorns  and  other  nuts.  This  fare 
was  supplemented  in  some  instances  with  Indian  corn.  Judd  80  reports  that 
in  the  Connecticut  Valley,  where  pork-packing  for  the  West  India  market  de¬ 
veloped  about  1660,  the  swine  were  fattened  with  Indian  corn  before  slaugh¬ 
tering.  Van  der  Donck  81  says  of  the  swine  of  New  Netherland: 

“  Hogs  are  numerous  and  plenty.  Many  are  bred  and  kept  by  the  settlers  in  the 
neighbourhood  of  the  woods  and  lowlands.  Some  of  the  citizens  prefer  the  English 
breed  of  hogs,  because  they  are  hardy,  and  subsist  better  in  winter  without  shelter ;  but 
the  Holland  hogs  grow  much  larger  and  heavier,  and  have  thicker  pork.  In  some  years 
acorns  are  so  abundant  in  the  woods,  that  the  hogs  become  fine  and  fat  on  the  same, 
their  pork  frequently  being  a  hand-breadth  in  thickness.  When  it  is  not  an  acorn  year, 


75  Scot,  in  N.  J.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  I,  298,  314. 

76  In  Myers’s  Narratives,  22Q.  See  also  Thomas,  ibid.,  319. 

77  De  Voe,  Market  Book,  43. 

78  Mass.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  3d  series,  III,  338. 

79  Good  Order  Established  in  Penn,  and  N.  J.  (1685),  p.  37. 

80  Hadley  (Mass.),  370. 

81  N.  Y.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  2d  series,  I,  166. 


32 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


or  where  persons  have  not  an  opportunity  to  feed  their  swine  on  acorns,  in  those  cases 
they  fat  their  hogs  on  maize,  or  Turkey  wheat,  which,  according  to  the  accepted  opinions, 
produces  the  best  pork,  being  better  than  the  Westphalia  pork.  The  heavy  pork  is  fre¬ 
quently  six  or  seven  fingers  in  thickness,  and  will  crack  when  cut.  The  persons  who  desire 
to  raise  many  hogs,  take  care  to  have  sucking  pigs  in  April.  When  the  grass  is  fine,  the 
sows  and  pigs  are  driven  woodwards  to  help  themselves.  At  a  year  old  the  young  sows 
have  pigs.  Thus  hogs  are  multiplied,  and  are  plenty  in  New-Netherland.” 

Table  6. — Swine,  over  one  year  old. 


[Sources:  O’Callaglian,  Doc.  Hist.  N.  Y.,  II,  439  et  seq.;  IV,  139  et  seq.;  Boston  Tax  Lists  in 

First  Report  Boston  Records  (1876),  128  et  seq.] 


Long 

Island, 

Dutch 

towns. 

Long 

Island, 

English 

towns. 

Boston, 

Muddy 

River. 

Boston, 

Romney 

Marsh. 

Essex 

County 

inven¬ 

tories. 

Con¬ 

necticut 

inven¬ 

tories. 

New 

Haven 

inven¬ 

tories. 

Total. 

Total  farms  listed . 

153 

271 

31 

34 

50 

15 

l6 

570 

No.  of  farms  reporting 

360 

swine  . 

77 

174 

13 

29 

40 

14 

13 

Per  cent  of  all  farms  re- 

porting  swine  . 

50 

64 

42 

85 

80 

93 

8l 

63 

Total  swine  reported... 

185 

1,159 

29 

95 

160 

88 

8l 

L797 

Average  No.  per  farm. 

2.4 

6.7 

2.2 

3-3 

4.0 

6-3 

6.2 

47 

No.  of  farms  reporting — 

269 

1  to  5  swine . 

72 

108 

13 

2  7 

33 

7 

9 

6  to  10  swine . 

5 

42 

0 

1 

5 

5 

2 

78 

11  to  15  swine . 

0 

10 

0 

0 

1 

2 

1 

14 

16  to  20  swine . 

0 

12 

0 

1 

1 

0 

0 

14 

Over  20  swine . 

0 

2 

0 

0 

0 

0 

1 

3 

Largest  No.  reported... 

9 

30 

D 

20 

18 

15 

28 

30 

OTHER  LIVESTOCK. 

Goats  were  a  part  of  the  initial  equipment  of  early  settlements  in  New 
England  and  in  New  Netherland.  They  cost  less  in  Europe,  were  hardier 
than  cows  or  sheep,  and  were  easier  to  transport.  The  milk  and  meat  which 
they  provided  was  a  welcome  addition  to  the  colonists’  scanty  food  supplies. 
Johnson82  remarked  in  1650  that  at  Lynn,  Massachusetts:  “  Goates  which 
were  in  great  esteeme  at  their  first  coming,  are  now  almost  quite  banished. 
.  .  .  .”  The  examination  of  inventories  of  estates  shows  that  goats  had  be¬ 
come  negligible  by  the  end  of  the  seventeenth  century.  Poultry,  including 
fowls,  geese,  ducks,  and  turkeys,  were  brought  from  England  with  the  first 
settlers.  Bees  seem  to  have  been  more  common  in  the  Middle  Colonies  than  in 
New  England.  In  New  York,  says  Denton,  83  “you  shall  scarce  see  a  house, 
but  the  South  side  is  begirt  with  Hives  of  Bees,  which  increase  after  an 
incredible  manner . ”  Near  Philadelphia,  says  Thomas : 84 

“  Bees  thrive  and  multiply  exceedingly,  ....  the  Sweeds  often  get  great  store  of 
them  in  the  woods  where  they  are  free  for  any  Body.  Honey  (and  choice  too)  is  sold 
in  the  Capital  City  for  Five  Pence  per  Pound.  Wax  is  also  plentiful,  cheap,  and  a 
considerable  Commerce.” 


82  Wonder  Working  Providence,  73. 

83  Brief  Description  of  New  York  (1670),  p.  21. 

84  Myers’s  Narratives,  324. 


Chapter  III. — Farm  Labor,  Equipment,  and  Land. 

LABOR  SCARCE  AND  WAGES  HIGH. 

The  scarcity  of  labor  and  the  resulting  high  rate  of  wages  are  conditions 
commonly  found  in  new  countries,  resulting  inevitably  from  the  cheapness 
of  land.  Thomas1  wrote  from  Pennsylvania  in  1698: 

“  The  chief  reason  why  Wages  of  Servants  of  all  sorts  is  much  higher  here  than 
there,  arises  from  the  great  Fertility  and  Produce  of  the  Place;  besides,  if  these  large 
Stipends  were  refused  them,  they  would  quickly  set  up  for  themselves,  for  they  can  have 
Provision  very  cheap,  and  Land  for  a  very  small  matter,  or  next  to  nothing  in  com¬ 
parison  of  the  Purchace  of  Lands  in  England;  .  .  . 

As  early  as  1633  Winthrop  2  had  complained  of  high  wages  in  the  Massa¬ 
chusetts  Bay  Colony.  He  says :  “  The  scarcity  of  workmen  had  caused  them  to 

raise  their  wages  to  an  excessive  rate . ”  In  the  years  from  1630  to 

the  middle  of  the  century  we  find  the  colony  and  town  authorities  recognizing 
the  condition  and  attempting  to  meet  it  by  fixing  maximum  wage  rates.3 

Unsuccessful  attempts  were  made  to  use  the  native  Indians  as  farm  labor¬ 
ers.  Pastorius  4  wrote : 

“  If  one  of  these  savages  allows  himself  to  be  persuaded  by  a  Christian  to  work,  he 
does  it  with  complaining,  shame,  and  fear,  as  an  unaccustomed  act ;  he  looks  about  him 
all  the  while  on  all  sides,  lest  any  of  his  people  may  find  him  working,  just  as  if  work 
were  a  disgrace,  and  idleness  were  an  especial  inborn  privilege  of  the  nobility,  which 
should  not  be  soiled  by  the  sweat  of  toil.” 

\ 

The  use  of  negro  slaves  in  tobacco  plantations  had  already  begun  in  Vir¬ 
ginia  and  Maryland  before  1700,  and  slaves  were  used  in  New  England  and 
the  Middle  Colonies,  usually  for  domestic  service.  Occasionally  farm  labor 
was  performed  by  negro  slaves  even  in  the  North.  In  East  New  Jersey 
(1685),  Colonel  Morris  employed  60  or  70  negroes  on  his  manor;  another 
planter  had  20  slaves,  and  a  third,  7  or  8.5 

Indentured  servants  who  were  to  play  an  important  part  in  the  develop¬ 
ment  of  the  Middle  Colonies  in  the  eighteenth  century  had  not  yet  appeared  in 
large  numbers.  Their  presence  in  New  England  is  evident  from  occasional 
mention  in  town  records.  They  were  employed  more  usually  as  artisans’ 
helpers  than  as  farm  laborers.  In  the  larger-scale  farming  of  New  Jersey 
and  Pennsylvania,  indentured  servants  were  more  common.  As  soon  as 
their  time  was  up  they  took  up  lands  for  themselves  and  so  formed  a  tempor¬ 
ary  and  constantly  fluctuating  labor-supply. 

1  Historical  Account,  in  Myers’s  Narratives,  328. 

-  New  England,  I,  138. 

3  New  Haven  Colony  Records,  36;  Connecticut  Colony  Public  Records,  I,  65;  Burt,  First 

Century  of  Springfield,  I,  168;  Massachusetts  Bay  Colonial  Records,  I,  109;  Plymouth 

Colony  Records,  I,  128. 

4  In  Myers’s  Narratives,  386.  See  also  Report  of  a  French  Protestant  Refugee  (1687), 

p.  20. 

5  Scot,  in  N.  J.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  I,  271,  275. 


4 


33 


34 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


The  chief  reliance  for  farm  labor,  therefore,  in  the  earliest  settlements  was 
in  the  farm  family  itself,  including  not  only  the  adult  males,  but  women  and 
children  as  well.  As  Johnson  wrote,  “  every  one  that  can  lift  a  hawe  [hoe] 
standing  stoutly  to  their  labours.”  Labor  was  economized  as  much  as  pos¬ 
sible.  We  have  seen  that  the  planting  of  corn  among  standing  trunks  of  dead 
trees  soon  replaced  the  more  thorough  methods  of  clearing.  The  institutions 
of  common  fields  and  of  town  herdsmen  were  developed  to  save  labor  in 
farming. 

GROUP  COOPERATION. 

Tasks  of  unusual  difficulty  or  urgency  were  accomplished  by  group  coop¬ 
eration.  In  New  England,  where  a  communal  spirit  was  strongly  developed, 
such  cooperation  was  often  compulsory.  For  example,  in  Northampton, 
(Mass.),  it  was  enacted  (1718)  6 

“that  Every  man  from  sixteen  years  old  to  Sixty;  Work  one  or  Two  Days  (In  Each 
year  as  the  Selectt  men  for  the  time  being  shall  Directt)  att  clearing  the  commons 
for  Sheep;  the  men  to  work  in  Small  companys,  att  Such  Time  and  In  such  Place,  and 
under  the  Inspection  of  such  men  as  the  Selectt  men  shall  a  Point,  None  To  fail  of  any 
of  the  above  Injuncttions  under  the  Penalty  of  flue  Shillings  forefitture.” 

Artisans  were  impressed  to  aid  the  farmers  in  harvest  time.  In  the  Massa¬ 
chusetts  Bay  Colony  in  1646  the  following  law  was  passed : 7 

“  Because  the  harvest  of  hay,  corn,  flax,  and  hemp  comes  usually  so  near  together 
that  much  loss  can  hardly  be  avoided,  it  is  ordered  and  decreed  by  this  court,  that  the 
constable  of  every  town,  upon  request  made  to  him,  shall  require  artificers  or  handi¬ 
craftsmen,  meet  to  labor,  to  work  by  the  day  for  their  neighbor’s  needing  him,  in  mowing, 
reaping,  and  inning  thereof,  and  that  those  whom  they  help  shall  duly  pay  them  for  their 
work,  and  if  any  person  so  required  shall  refuse,  or  the  constable  neglect  his  office 
herein,  they  shall  each  of  them  pay  to  the  use  of  the  poor  of  the  town  double  so  much 
as  such  a  day’s  work  comes  unto ;  provided  no  artificer,  etc.,  shall  be  compelled  to  work 
for  others  while  he  is  necessarily  attending  on  like  business  of  his  own.” 

Voluntary  cooperation  of  groups  of  settlers  in  heavy  tasks,  as,  for  instance, 
in  log-rolling  bees,  corn-huskings,  etc.,  soon  took  the  place  of  compulsory 
cooperation,  and  in  the  eighteenth  century  became  a  significant  feature  of 
colonial  agriculture  in  the  North. 

FARM  EQUIPMENT,— TOOLS  AND  IMPLEMENTS. 

The  lack  of  capital,  a  characteristic  condition  in  all  new  settlements,  we 
have  already  seen  illustrated  in  the  scarcity  of  livestock  and  food  supplies. 
It  is  no  less  strikingly  shown  in  the  poverty  of  farm  tools  and  implements. 
A  list  of  the  tools  considered  necessary  for  a  settler's  family  of  six  persons 
was  given  by  Josselyn8  in  the  account  of  his  first  voyage  to  New  England, 
1638: 

“  Five  broad  howes,  five  narrow  howes,  five  felling  axes,  two  steel  hand-sawes,  two 
hand-sawes,  one  whip  saw,  set  and  filed  with  box,  a  file  and  wrest,  two  hammers,  three 
shovels,  two  spades,  two  augars,  two  broad  axes,  six  chissels,  three  gimblets,  two 
hatchets,  two  froues  to  cleave  pail,  two  hand-bills,  nails  of  all  sorts,  two  pick-axes, 
three  locks  and  three  pair  of  fetters,  two  currie  combs,  a  brand  to  brand  beasts  with, 


6  Trumbull,  Northampton ,  I,  560.  See  also  Connecticut  Colony  Public  Records ,  II,  139. 

7  Records,  II,  180.  (Spelling  modernized.) 

8  Mass.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  3d  series,  III,  224. 


FARM  LABOR,  EQUIPMENT,  AND  LAND 


35 


a  chain  and  lock  for  a  boat,  a  coulter  weighing  io  pound,  a  hand-vise,  a  pitchfork,  one 
hundred  weight  of  spikes,  nails  and  pins,  120  to  the  hundred,  a  share.” 

This  is  of  course  an  ideal  list  and  the  actual  outfit  of  most  settlers  was 
probably  far  more  inadequate.  In  the  inventories  of  Essex  County  estates 
( 1635-1664) , 9  the  following  agricultural  tools  were  mentioned: 

“  Bills,  broad  hoe,  carts,  colter,  dung  fork,  fans,  flail,  fork  tines,  forks,  grubaxe,  hand¬ 
bills,  harrow  tines,  harrows,  hay  knife,  hoes,  reaping  hooks,  mattocks,  pickaxes,  pitch- 
forks,  ploughs  and  ploughirons,  rakes,  scythes,  shovels,  sickles,  sleds,  spades,  wheel 
barrows,  wheels.” 

Hoes,  spades,  and  shovels,  scythes  and  reaping  hooks,  carts,  harrows,  and 
ploughs  are  most  frequently  mentioned.  A  few  of  the  more  complete  inven¬ 
tories  of  tools  are  reprinted  below : 10 

Estate  J.  Fairfield ,  W entrant,  1646  (221  acres  of  land.)  :  Axes,  saws,  shovels,  harrow 
tines,  an  iron  spade,  3  sickles,  wheelbarrow,  garden  rake,  pitchfork. 

Estate  E.  Lewis,  Lynn,  1650  (Land  not  given,)  :  2  little  harrows,  1  plow  with  coulter 
and  share,  pr.  wheels,  cart,  wain,  old  plow,  yokes,  2  scythes,  4  hooks,  a  fan, 
axes,  churn. 

Estate  John  Osgood,  Andover,  1650  (Land  not  given.)  :  3  hoes,  2  carts  and  wheels, 

ploughs  and  iron,  a  harrow,  spade,  crow,  3  scythes,  1  mattock,  pitchforks. 

Estate  W .  Stevens,  Newbury,  1653  (51  acres.)  :  Cart  and  wheels,  plough  and  plough 
irons,  scythe,  axes,  spade,  shovel,  sled,  and  wheelbarrow. 

Estate  G.  Burrill,  Lynn,  1654  (Land  not  given.)  :  Spades  and  hoes,  plough,  cart  and 
wheels,  dungcart,  pair  of  harrows. 

Estate  N.  Merrill,  Newbury,  1654  (I3  acres)  :  Cart,  wheels,  sled,  harrow,  spades,  mat¬ 
tock,  hoes,  shovel,  fan. 

An  unusually  prosperous  farmer  at  Hartford,  Connecticut,  left  the  follow¬ 
ing  tools  at  his  death  in  1640 :  1  wain,  1  plow,  2  plow  irons,  1  gang  of  harrow 
tines,  scythes,  4  hoes,  2  mattocks,  cheese  press,  fan,  axes,  wedges. 11 

PLOWS. 

Plows  were  scarce  in  the  early  settlements  in  New  England.  The  Pilgrims 
had  none  for  twelve  years  after  their  first  landing,  using  only  hoes  and 
mattocks  for  breaking  up  the  soil 12  and  in  1636  there  were  but  30  plows 
in  the  whole  Massachusetts  Bay  Colony.13  In  1642  hoes  were  still  used  in  the 
absence  of  plows  in  Rhode  Island.14  The  scarcity  of  plows  was  alleviated 
by  cooperative  action.  The  owner  of  a  plow  went  about  doing  plowing  for 
his  neighbors.  “  Ploughing  was  a  distinct  employment,”  says  Felt,15  “  and 
particular  men  made  it  their  chief  business  in  its  season.”  Various  towns 
paid  bounties  to  farmers  who  would  buy  a  plow  and  keep  it  in  repair.16 
Plows  are  mentioned  in  the  inventories  of  only  16  out  of  58  estates  pro¬ 
bated  in  Essex  County,  Massachusetts,  in  the  years  1636-1664, 17  and  in 
Hartford  (Conn.),  in  8  out  of  15  inventories  in  the  years  1639-1648.18 


9  Quarterly  Courts,  Records  and  Files,  I ;  Probate  Records,  I. 

10  Essex  County  Quarterly  Courts,  Records  and  Files,  I,  117,  207  >  240,  288,  355,  389. 

11  Connecticut  Colony  Public  Records,  I,  448. 

12  Flint,  Hundred  Years’  Progress,  in  Maine  Bd.  Agric.,  19th  Annual  Report  (1874), 

p.  hi. 

13  Winthrop,  New  England,  I,  246. 

14  Dorr,  Planting  of  Rhode  Island,  58. 

15  Ipswich,  47. 

16  Flint,  Hundred  Years’  Progress,  in  Maine  Bd.  Agric.,  19th  Annual  Report  (1874), 

p.  in. 

17  Quarterly  Courts,  Records  and  Files,  I ;  Probate  Records,  I. 

18  Connecticut  Colony  Public  Records,  I,  442-508. 


36 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


The  Swedish  colonists  on  the  Delaware  were  at  first  as  badly  provided 
with  agricultural  tools  as  with  livestock.  Among  the  lists  of  goods  sent 
over  on  the  various  expeditions  we  find  tools  mentioned  very  rarely.19  It 
seems  that  they  had  no  oxen  for  plowing  until  five  or  six  years  after 
the  colony  was  founded.20  But  the  Dutch  after  their  occupation  in  1656 
made  vigorous  efforts  to  furnish  adequate  equipment  to  their  colonists. 
The  following  list  of  tools  was  sent  from  Holland  in  1662: 21 

“  12  ploughshares,  with  coulters,  1  first-class  wheel  plough,  with  its  Pulleys,  &c.,  12 
two-prong  hay  and  grain  forks,  12  three-prong  hay  and  grain  forks,  100  iron  teeth  to 
make  harrows,  24  best  scythes,  24  good  reaping  hooks,  50  steeled  axes,  24  grubbing-hooks, 
20  winnowing  fans,  25  wheelbarrows,  30  spades,  30  shovels,  30  hoes,  20  iron  rakes,  12 
hay  knives.” 

The  English  colonists  who  came  to  the  Delaware  River  40  years  later 
seem  to  have  begun  breaking  up  the  ground  with  oxen  and  plows  in  their 
first  years.  The  equipment  considered  necessary  for  a  family  of  five  on  100 
acres  of  land  was  listed  by  Budd  22  as  follows : 

“  For  a  Share  and  Coulter,  a  Plow-Chain,  2  Scythes,  4  Sickles,  a  horse  Collar,  some 
Cordage  for  Harness,  2  Stock  Locks,  2  weeding  Hoes,  2  grubbing  Hoes,  one  cross-cut 
Saw,  2  Iron  Wedges,  1  Iron  Pot,  1  frying  Pan,  2  falling  Axes,  1  broad  Ax,  1  Spade, 
1  Hatchet,  1  Fro  to  cleave  Clapboard,  Shingle  and  Coopers  Timber.” 

Among  the  implements  used  by  Pennsylvania  farmers  Thomas  23  mentions 
“  Wooden-Tyned  Harrows,”  “  Plow  Irons  ”  which  had  to  be  mended  twice 
a  year,  carts,  and  wains. 

CARTS. 

The  first  carts  in  use  by  the  Swedes,  and  in  New  England,  also,  had 
wheels  which  were  mere  cross-sections  of  a  round  hardwood  log.  Farmers 
who  could  not  afford  carts  made  use  of  drags,  sleds,  or  sledges  drawn  by  oxen, 
horses,  or  by  hand  over  the  grass  in  summer  or  over  the  snow  in  winter.  An 
early  improvement 24  “  wras  simply  a  slender  crotched  tree,  with  prongs  some 
seven  or  eight  feet  long,  to  drag  on  the  ground ;  the  trunk  serving  the  pur¬ 
pose  of  a  sled-spire.  On  the  two  prongs  was  placed  a  box,  holding  eight  or 
ten  bushels,  called  a  car.”  The  implements  of  the  early  settlers  were  not 
only  few,  but  heavy,  clumsy,  and  ill-adapted  to  their  purposes.  The  wooden 
fork  was  often  shaped  by  the  farmer  himself ;  the  cart  irons,  ploughshares, 
chains,  axes,  bill-hooks,  scythes,  and  other  cutting  instruments  were  ham¬ 
mered  out  by  the  village  blacksmith.  Trumbull 23  says, 

“  The  mouldboard  of  the  old-fashioned  plow  was  a  straight  piece  of  wood,  sometimes 
shod  with  iron;  the  coulter  and  share  were  of  iron,  and  the  beam  was  long,  curved  and 
heavy.  It  was  an  awkward  and  ungainly  tool,  very  difficult  to  manage.  Mechanics, 
called  ‘plough  wrights,’  manufactured  the  majority  of  them,  but  many  were  made  by 

carpenters  and  blacksmiths  in  every  town . Most  of  the  harrows  had  teeth  of 

wood,  hardened  by  fire,  but  these  were  soon  discarded  for  teeth  of  iron.  Carts  were 
large,  solid,  and  heavy.  Their  wheels  were  in  many  instances  sawn  from  solid  plank, 

19  Johnson,  Swedish  Settlements,  I,  112,  128. 

20  Report  of  Governor  Prints  (1644),  in  Myers’s  Narratives,  107. 

21  N.  Y.  Doc .  Rel.  to  Col.  Hist.,  II,  184. 

22  Good  Order  Established  in  Pennsylvania  and  New  Jersey  (1685),  P-  8. 

23  In  Myers’s  Narratives,  319. 

24  Hayward,  Hancock,  N.  H.,  74;  Eggleston,  Husbandry  in  Colony  Times.  Century 

Magazine,  XXVII  (1883-84),  p.  446. 

25  Northampton,  I,  284. 


FARM  LABOR,  EQUIPMENT,  AND  LAND 


37 


and  were  used  without  tires  or  boxes.  Many  old  shovels  had  a  wooden  frame  and  were 
shod  with  iron.  Some  of  them,  however,  as  well  as  spades,  were  of  iron,  except  the 
handle.  Hoes  were  large  and  heavy,  especially  the  broad  hoe.  Medad  Pomeroy,  the 
blacksmith,  made  broad  hoes,  spades,  and  axes,  for  each  of  which  he  charged  five 
shillings.  These  cumbersome  implements  greatly  taxed  the  strength  of  men  and 
animals.” 

SIZE  OF  FARMS. 

In  New  England  the  land  holdings  of  the  first  settlers  were  not  large. 
Occasionally  large  grants  to  particular  individuals  were  made  by  the  colonial 
authorities,  or  by  the  trading  corporations  who  preceded  them,  but  the  more 
usual  method  of  land  distribution  was  to  communities  of  settlers.  A  group 
of  5°  or  ioo  heads  of  families  got  a  grant  for  a  township  and  divided  the 
land  among  themselves.  The  first  divisions  were  of  planting  and  meadow, 
the  cattle  being  herded  on  the  common  pastures.  Considering  the  cheapness 
of  land  the  early  divisions  are  surprisingly  small.  In  Dorchester,  Massa- 


Table  7. — Size  of  farms,  not  including  pasturage. 

[Sources:  O’Callaghan.  Doc.  Hist.  N.  Y.,  II,  439  et  seq. ;  IV,  139  et  seq.;  Boston  Tax  Lists  in 

First  Report  Boston  Records  (1876),  128  et  seq.] 


Long 

Island, 

Dutch 

towns, 

1675. 

Long 

Island, 

English 

towns, 

1675. 

Boston, 

Muddy 

River 

1675. 

Boston, 

Romney 

Marsh. 

1687. 

Total. 

No.  of  farms . 

146 

259 

30 

33 

469 

Total  farm  acreage . 

5,554-6 

4,669.0 

406.5 

1,2350 

11,865.1 

Average  acreage  . 

No.  of  farms  reporting — 

38.0 

l8.0 

13-5 

37  4 

25.0 

1  to  20  acres . 

102 

183 

26 

18 

329 

21  to  40  acres . 

38 

62 

3 

10 

113 

41  to  60  acres . 

4 

8 

I 

0 

13 

61  to  80  acres . 

2 

4 

0 

1 

7 

81  to  100  acres . 

0 

I 

0 

0 

1 

Over  100  acres . 

0 

I 

0 

4 

5 

chusetts,  the  division  of  1638  gave  an  average  of  10  acres  per  family;  in 
Hartford,  Connecticut  (1640),  the  average  allotment  was  27  acres,  and  in 
New  Haven,  Connecticut  (1640),  44  acres.26 

Inventories  of  estates  give  us  additional  information  on  the  size  of 
farms.  In  Essex  County,27  42  estates  probated  in  the  years  1635-1664  show 
land  holdings  ranging  from  1  to  234  acres  with  an  average  of  50  acres  each. 
Of  these  holdings,  21,  or  one-half,  were  under  20  acres,  and  32  (76  per  cent) 
were  under  50  acres.  In  the  Connecticut  colony  28  13  estates  probated  1639- 
1648  show  landholdings  ranging  from  6  to  221  acres  and  averaging  60  acres 
each.  Of  these  5  (39  per  cent)  were  under  20  acres  and  7  (54  per  cent)  under 
50  acres.  It  should  be  remembered  that  these  figures  do  not  include  pasture 
land  which  was  largely  held  in  common  and  when  included  in  the  inventories 
was  designated  as  commons  for  so  many  cows  and  not  specifically  in  acres. 
The  size  of  farms  (not  including  pasturage)  in  10  towns  on  Long  Island 
and  in  2  districts  of  Boston  is  shown  in  table  7. 

20  For  a  fuller  discussion  of  these  allotments  see  chapter  V,  pp.  52-54. 

27  Essex  County  Quarterly  Courts,  Records  and  Files,  I,  Probate  Records,  I. 

28  Connecticut  Colony  Public  Records,  I,  442-508. 


38 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


The  difference  between  the  land  holdings  in  the  five  Dutch  and  the  five 
English  towns  is  remarkable.  In  the  former,  Brooklyn,  Boswyck  (Bush- 
wick),  Midwout  (Flatbush),  Amersfort  (Flatlands),  and  New  Utrecht,  the 
average  taxable  land  area  in  146  farms  was  38  acres,  but  in  the  English 
towns  (Huntington,  Southhold,  Flushing,  Newtown,  and  Brookhaven)  260 
farms  averaged  only  18  acres  of  taxable  land.  The  explanation  is  not  found 
in  smaller-scale  agriculture  in  the  English  farms,  for  the  returns  of  live¬ 
stock  in  the  same  tax  lists  show  an  average  of  24  animals  per  farm  in  English 
towns,  as  against  only  14  per  farm  in  the  Dutch  towns.  If  pasture  land  had 
been  included,  the  English  farms  would  have  been  much  larger  than  the 
Dutch.  It  was  on  the  latter  that  the  more  intensive  type  of  agriculture  was 
found.  In  Holland  agriculture  was  considerably  more  advanced  in  the  early 
seventeenth  century  than  in  England,  and,  besides,  the  geographical  position 
of  the  Dutch  settlers  on  the  western  end  of  Long  Island  gave  them  ready 
access  to  the  New  York  market.  Only  two  of  the  English  towns  were  on 
the  western  end  of  the  island ;  the  others  were  in  the  central  part  and  on  the 
eastern  end,  at  distances  varying  from  35  to  90  miles  from  Manhattan 
Island.  The  English  settlers  confined  their  attention  more  largely  to  the 
raising  of  cattle,  which  they  fed  on  the  tax-exempt  commons. 

There  are  interesting  differences  in  the  size  of  farms  in  the  two  farming 
districts  of  Boston,  Muddy  River  and  Romney  Marsh  and  the  islands.  The 
former  is  now  one  of  the  richest  suburban  residential  districts  in  America. 
But  by  a  strange  irony  of  fate  it  was  originally  assigned  to  the  poorer  inhabi¬ 
tants  of  Boston  who  had  no  cattle.29  Romney  Marsh  (now  Chelsea,  a  rela¬ 
tively  undesirable  suburb),  was  assigned  to  the  wealthy  settlers  who  had 
servants  to  till  their  lands.30 

LAND  UTILIZATION. 

The  information  available  on  the  distribution  of  land  into  arable,  mowing, 
and  pasture  is  very  fragmentary.  According  to  the  Boston  tax  lists  of  1687, 
the  farms  in  Muddy  River  had  63  per  cent  of  their  area  in  pasture,  and  in 
Romney  Marsh,  72  per  cent.  We  have  occasionally  rather  full  descriptions 
of  land  in  the  inventories  of  the  larger  estates.  For  example,  the  inventory 
of  N.  Foote,31  of  Wethersfield  (1646),  showed  169  acres  in  9  parcels,  of 
which  21  acres  were  in  tillage,  37  in  meadow,  81  in  upland,  27  acres  in  swamp, 
and  14  acres  in  two  house  lots.  The  estate  of  T.  Dewy  (1648),  totaled  49 
acres  in  seven  parcels,  distributed  as  follows:  Houselot,  ij  acres;  meadow, 
18J  acres;  tillage,  12  acres;  upland,  17J  acres.  In  the  Essex  County  inven¬ 
tories  tillage  is  specifically  mentioned  12  times  in  lots  ranging  from  2  to  33 
acres.  The  average  amount  was  9  acres.  In  20  estates  meadow  was  specific¬ 
ally  mentioned  in  amounts  averaging  12  acres  per  farm. 

While  no  precise  conclusions  can  be  drawn  from  such  fragmentary  data, 
it  appears  that  in  New  England  and  on  Long  Island  the  amount  of  arable 
and  mowing  land  managed  by  the  typical  farm  family  was  not  greater  than 
40  nor  less  than  10  acres.  Planting  land,  the  inventories  of  estates  indicate, 

29  Muddy  River  and  Brookline  Records,  I,  13,  14. 

30  Chamberlain,  Chelsea,  I,  123. 

31  Connecticut  Colony  Public  Records,  I,  462. 


FARM  LABOR,  EQUIPMENT,  AND  LAND 


39 


occupied  less  acreage  than  mowing.  Since  livestock  was  generally  pastured 
in  common  herds  in  the  woods  and  on  unimproved  land,  the  acreage  of  pas¬ 
turage  pertaining  to  each  farm  can  not  be  estimated.  Regarding  New  Jersey 
and  Pennsylvania  no  comparable  statistical  records  are  available.  We  know 
that  the  system  of  land  tenure  favored  large  estates  and  a  few  records  of  large- 
scale  agriculture  have  been  preserved.  Among  Penn’s  colonists  were  a  num¬ 
ber  of  rich  men  who  began  large-scale  operations.  The  letters  of  early 
settlers  32  of  East  New  Jersey  show  several  cases  of  plantations,  outside  the 
settled  towns,  of  several  thousand  acres  each,  cultivated  with  the  aid  of  negro 
slaves  or  with  indentured  servants. 


32  Scot,  in  N.  J.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  I,  271-277 ;  287-295. 


Chapter  IV. — Trade  in  Agricultural  Products. 

IMPORTS  OF  FOOD. 

Neither  New  England  nor  the  Middle  Colonies  had  in  the  seventeenth 
century  a  great  agricultural  staple  for  export,  such  as  the  tobacco  of  Vir¬ 
ginia  or  the  rice  and  indigo  of  the  Carolinas,  but  nevertheless  the  exchange 
of  agricultural  products  seems  to  have  held  a  prominent  place  in  their 
economic  life.  At  the  very  first  we  find  all  the  early  settlements  importing 
food.  As  we  have  already  pointed  out,  colonies  established  by  trading  com¬ 
panies,  such  as  the  Plymouth  Colony,  the  Massachusetts  Bay  Colony,  and 
those  established  by  the  Dutch  and  Swedish  West  India  Companies  on  the 
Hudson  and  Delaware  Rivers,  were  intended  to  live  by  fishing  or  by  trading 
for  furs  with  the  Indians,  and  it  was  expected  that  they  would  import  a  part 
at  least  of  their  food  supplies.  Higginson  (1629)  advised  all  immigrants  to 
Massachusetts  Bay  to  bring  a  year’s  stock  of  food  with  them.1  Van  Tien- 
hoven  2  wrote  in  1650 : 

“And  as  it  is  found  by  experience  in  New  Netherland  that  farmers  can  with  difficulty 
obtain  from  the  soil  enough  to  provide  themselves,  with  necessary  victuals  and  support, 
those  who  propose  planting  Colonies  must  supply  their  farmers  and  families  with 
necessary  food  for  at  least  two  to  three  years,  if  not  altogether  it  must  be  done  at 
least  in  part.” 

The  scarcity  of  food  in  the  early  years  of  some  of  the  settlements  was 
pitiful.  For  three  years  the  Plymouth  Colony  was  on  the  verge  of  starvation 
and  maintained  life  only  by  strict  rationing  of  its  grain,  by  purchases  from 
the  Indians,  and  by  making  extensive  use  of  the  fish,  game,  and  wild  food 
plants.3  In  the  earliest  settlements  on  Massachusetts  Bay,  and  also  at  Provi¬ 
dence  and  at  Hartford,  we  find  scarcity  of  food,  especially  cereals,  repeatedly 
mentioned  until  about  1640.4  In  May  1648  there  was  not  enough  grain 
in  the  Massachusetts  Bay  Colony  to  sustain  the  inhabitants  for  two  months, 
and  in  consequence  all  export  of  grain  was  prohibited.5  The  Swedish  colony 
on  the  Delaware,  for  20  years  after  its  founding  in  1638,  was  dependent  on 
outside  sources  of  food  supplies.  Governor  Printz  wrote  back  to  Sweden 
in  1647:  “The  reason  that  so  many  people  died  in  the  year  1643  was  that 
they  had  then  to  begin  to  work,  and  but  little  to  eat.”  6  Hunting  was  the 
chief  reliance  of  the  first  settlers  of  West  Jersey,  but  powder  and  shot  became 
so  scarce  that  they  had  to  live  on  fish.7  Penn’s  colonists  at  Philadelphia  had 

1  In  Young’s  Chronicles,  263. 

2  In  O’Callaghan  Documentary  History  of  New  York,  IV,  33. 

3  Bradford,  Plymouth  Plantation,  138,  156,  157. 

4  Winthrop,  New  England,  I,  128,  219;  Johnson,  Wonder  Working  Providence,  1 15,  210; 

Rhode  Island  Records,  I,  98;  Winthrop,  Life  and  Letters,  II,  302. 

5  Massachusetts  Bay  Colony  Records,  II,  240. 

G  In  Myers’s  Narratives,  121. 

7  Smith,  New  Jersey,  155. 


40 


TRADE  IN  AGRICULTURAL  PRODUCTS 


41 


the  easiest  time  of  all.  They  purchased  corn  and  beef  from  the  old  inhabi¬ 
tants  (i.  e.,  the  Swedes),  who  had  by  this  time  a  flourishing  agricultural 
settlement,  and  imported  some  provisions  also  from  New  York,  New  Eng¬ 
land,  and  Rhode  Island.8  Penn  wrote  back  to  England  in  1683,9  when  the 
new  colony  had  been  established  less  than  a  year, 

“  the  greatest  hardship  we  have  suffered,  hath  been  Salt-Meat,  which  by  Fowl  in  Winter, 
and  Fish  in  Summer,  together  with  some  Poultery,  Lamb,  Mutton,  Veal,  and  plenty  of 
Venison  the  best  part  of  the  year,  hath  been  made  very  passable.” 


PURCHASES  OF  CORN  FROM  THE  NATIVES. 

Purchases  of  Indian  corn  from  the  natives  were  frequent  and  must  have 
proved  important  additions  to  the  colonists’  scanty  food-supplies.  All  along 
the  North  Atlantic  coast  the  Indians  were  found  living  by  agriculture  as 
well  as  by  hunting  and  fishing.  The  Indian  corn,  whose  cultivation  they 
taught  the  colonists,  was  their  most  important  crop.  Very  early  in  the  his¬ 
tory  of  the  New  England  settlements  we  find  recorded  purchases  of  corn 
from  the  Indians.  For  example,  in  1630  the  Massachusetts  Bay  colonists  got 
100  bushels  from  the  Indians  on  Cape  Cod  10  and  in  1634  they  bought  500 
bushels  from  the  Narragansets.* 11  At  Hartford  on  the  Connecticut  River 
in  1637  the  supply  of  corn  in  the  hands  of  the  natives  was  considered  so 
important  that  the  trade  was  forbidden  to  individuals  in  the  colony.12  It 
would  seem  that  by  1641  purchases  of  Indian  com  for  resale  had  begun,  for 
in  that  year  a  penalty  of  4d.  per  bushel  was  imposed  on  all  who  buy  corn 
from  the  Indians,  provided  “  they  buy  it  not  for  to  supply  their  own  nec¬ 
essity.”  13  Van  Tienhoven  14  wrote  from  New  Netherland  in  1650 : 

“  If  no  wheat  or  rye  can  be  had  for  bread,  maize  can  be  always  had  in  season  from 
the  Indians  at  a  reasonable  price.” 

The  early  Dutch  settlement  on  Delaware  Bay  bought  corn  and  beans  from 
the  Indians,  as  did  their  Swedish  successors.15  The  colonists  of  East  New 
Jersey  not  only  got  corn,  but  venison  and  pork  from  the  Indians.16  The  pork 
must  have  been  from  swine  escaped  from  other  settlements,  running  wild 
in  the  woods. 

BEGINNING  OF  REGIONAL  SPECIALIZATION. 

The  trade  in  agricultural  products  among  the  original  European  settle¬ 
ments  in  America  seems  at  first  to  have  been  sporadic — the  relief  of  occa¬ 
sional  scarcity  at  one  point  from  a  surplus  at  another.  Thus,  New  England 
in  1633  17  bought  sheep  from  the  Dutch  of  New  Netherland,  and  a  genera- 

8  Penn,  Further  Account  of  Pennsylvania,  in  Myers’s  Narratives,  266.  See  also  Penn. 

Magazine  of  History,  VII,  271 ;  Acrelius,  New  Sweden,  36. 

9  Letter  to  the  Free  Society  of  Traders,  in  Myers’s  Narratives,  240. 

10  Dudley’s  Letter  to  the  Countess  of  Lincoln,  in  Young’s  Chronicles,  323. 

11  Winthrop,  New  England,  I,  175. 

32  Connecticut  Colony  Public  Records,  I,  11. 

73  Ibid.,  I,  68. 

14  In  O’Callaghan  Documentary  History  of  New  York,  IV,  33. 

15  DeVries  in  Myers’s  Narratives,  18;  Report  of  Governor  Printz,  op.  cit.,  99. 

16  Scot,  in  N.  J.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  I,  302. 

17  Winthrop,  New  England,  I,  124. 


42 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


tion  later  we  find  New  England  supplying  sheep  as  well  as  beef,  flour,  wheat, 
butter,  and  cider  to  New  Netherlands3  Such  also  was  the  nature  of  the 
exchanges  by  which  New  England  relieved  the  food  scarcity  in  New 
Sweden.19  But  there  was  also  in  progress  in  these  early  years  the  beginnings 
of  agricultural  trade  based  on  the  special  natural  resources  of  particular 
regions.  The  peculiar  advantages  of  New  England  for  maritime  pursuits 
were  early  apparent.  Its  imports  of  corn  and  wheat,  at  first  from  the  South¬ 
ern  and  later  from  the  Middle  Colonies,  were  not  entirely  due  to  inability 
to  raise  a  sufficient  supply  of  these  grains  at  home,  but  in  part  at  least  to  the 
realization  of  the  advantages  of  specialization  in  fishing,  trading,  and  ship¬ 
building. 

The  import  of  corn  meal  from  Virginia  began  almost  as  soon  as  the  New 
England  settlements  were  founded.  In  1631,  700  bushels  of  Virginia  com 
were  received  at  Mason’s  plantation  on  the  Piscataqua  River,20  and  in  1634, 
when  immigration  had  greatly  swelled  the  population  of  the  Massachusetts 
Bay  Colony,  5,000  bushels  of  corn  were  brought  from  Virginia  in  half  a 
year.21 

TRADE  WITH  THE  WEST  INDIES. 

The  trade  of  New  England  and  the  Middle  Colonies  with  the  English, 
French,  and  Dutch  islands  in  the  Caribbean  Sea  was  a  central  feature  of 
the  economic  life  of  the  English  settlements  in  America.  The  sugar  planters 
in  the  West  India  Islands  were  engaged  in  specialized  agriculture.  Their 
cash  crop  was  so  profitable  that  they  could  not  afford  to  use  land  or  labor  in 
grazing  cattle  or  in  cultivating  food  crops.  On  the  other  hand,  New  England 
and  the  Middle  Colonies  had  no  agricultural  staples.  Their  products  were 
the  same  as  those  of  Northern  Europe  and  consequently,  except  on  occasions 
of  crop  failure  in  Europe,  there  was  no  market  there  for  either  colonial 
grain  or  meat.  But  there  was  a  good  market  for  such  products  in  the  West 
Indies,  and  so  the  general  agriculture  or  mixed  husbandry  of  the  colonies 
north  of  Maryland  supplemented  the  specialized  farming  of  the  sugar  planta¬ 
tions  in  the  seventeenth  century.  In  the  late  eighteenth  and  early  nineteenth 
centuries  the  rice  and  cotton  plantations  of  the  South  furnished  a  similar 
market  for  the  products  of  northern  agriculture. 

The  trade  relations  of  other  English  colonies  with  New  England  were 
early  regarded  as  of  particular  importance.  Says  an  early  writer  on  colonial 
economy : 22 

“The  other  American  plantations  cannot  well  subsist  without  New  England,  which 
is  by  a  thousand  leagues  nearer  to  them  than  either  England  or  Ireland;  so  that  they 
are  supplied  with  provisions,  beef,  pork,  meal,  fish,  &c.,  also  with  the  lumber  trade,  deal 
boards,  pipe  staves,  &c.,  chiefly  from  New  England.  Also  the  Caribbee  Islands  have 
their  horses  from  thence.  It  is  then,  in  a  great  part,  by  means  of  New  England,  that 
the  other  plantations  are  made  prosperous  and  beneficial.” 

18  Description  of  the  Towne  of  Manhaddens,  in  Jameson’s  Narratives,  423. 

10  Reports  of  Governor  Rising,  1654,  1655,  in  Myers’s  Narratives,  1 36,  158;  see  also 

Keen,  New  Sweden,  in  Winsor’s  America,  IV,  455,  474. 

20  Deane,  Capt.  John  Mason,  62. 

21  Calendar  of  State  Papers,  Colonial,  I,  America  and  the  West  Indies  (1574-1660), 

P:  175. 

22  Brief  Relation  of  New  England  (1689),  in  Mass.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  3d  series,  I,  98. 


TRADE  IN  AGRICULTURAL  PRODUCTS 


43 


The  economic  development  of  New  England,  also,  was  greatly  forwarded 
by  the  West  India  trade.  It  yielded  a  “  favorable  balance,”  i.  e.,  exports  were 
larger  than  imports,  and  with  this  surplus  and  the  carrying  charges,  for  the 
New  Englanders  used  their  own  vessels,  they  were  able  to  purchase  manufac¬ 
tured  goods  from  Europe. 

EXPORTS  OF  GRAIN,  PROVISIONS  AND  HORSES  FROM 

NEW  ENGLAND. 

Just  when  exports  of  agricultural  products  from  New  England  to  the 
West  Indies  first  began  is  uncertain  and  relatively  unimportant.  Occasional 
shipments  were  made  between  1640  and  1650. 23  In  the  latter  year  trade  to  the 
Barbados  was  important  enough  to  incur  official  prohibition  by  an  Act  of 
Parliament.24  But  the  reports  of  food  scarcity  and  the  imports  from  Virginia 
show  that  there  was  no  actual  surplus  in  New  England  for  export  before  the 
middle  of  the  century.  In  1650,  Johnson  25  points  out,  in  somewhat  exagger¬ 
ated  language,  the  significant  transition  from  a  condition  of  food  importation 
to  food  exportation  in  the  Massachusetts  Bay  Colony.  He  mentions  wheat 
and  peas,  beef,  pork,  butter,  and  cheese  among  the  export  products  and  adds : 

“  and  those  who  were  formerly  forced  to  fetch  most  of  the  bread  they  eat,  and  beer  they 
drink,  a  hundred  leagues  by  Sea,  are  through  the  blessing  of  the  Lord  so  encreased, 
that  they  have  not  only  fed  their  Elder  Sisters,  Virginia,  Barbados,  and  many  of  the 
Summer  Islands  that  were  prefer’d  before  her  for  fruitfulness,  but  also  the  Grand¬ 
mother  of  us  all,  even  the  firtil  Isle  of  Great  Britain,  beside  Portugal  hath  had  many  a 
mouthful  of  bread  and  fish  from  us,  in  exchange  of  their  Madeara  liquor,  and  also  Spain.” 

Ten  years  later  Governor  Winthrop26  wrote  from  the  Connecticut  colony: 

“  I  must  lett  you  first  know  that,  through  the  great  blessing  of  the  Lord  vpon  the 
labours  of  the  people  heere,  there  is  a  comfortable  supply  of  all  sorts  of  corne  &  provi¬ 
sions  necessary  for  subsistance,  &  that  not  only  for  themselves  (the  present  inhabitans), 
but  also  for  many  others ;  so  as  it  is  not  now  as  in  our  beginnings,  when  we  were  neces¬ 
sitated  to  bring  wth  us  provitions  sufficient  for  a  long  tyme,  but  now  the  country  doth 
send  out  great  store  of  biscott,  flower,  peas,  beife,  porke,  butter,  &  other  provisions 
to  the  supply  of  Barbados,  Newfoundland,  &  other  places,  besides  the  furnishing  out 
many  vessells  &  fishing  boats  of  their  owne,  so  as  those  who  come  over  may  supply 
themselves  at  very  reasonable  rates.” 

In  the  reports  of  the  Commissioners  in  New  England  (1665)  27  corn,  beef, 
pork,  and  horses  are  given  as  exports  from  New  England,  and  in  1675  butter, 
cheese,  flour,  peas,  biscuit,  are  mentioned  in  addition  to  beef,  pork,  and 
horses.28  About  the  middle  of  the  seventeenth  century  there  seems  to  have 
been  a  short  period  intervening  between  two  periods  of  the  importation  of 
breadstufifs,  when  New  England  had  a  surplus  of  wheat  and  corn  for  export. 
The  fertile  lands  of  the  Connecticut  Valley  were  yielding  good  crops  of  grain, 

23  Exports  of  horses,  beef,  meal,  and  pease  are  mentioned  in  1648,  in  Description  of  the 

Province  of  New  Albion,  in  Force,  Tracts,  II,  5.  See  also  Weeden,  Social  and 
Economic  History  of  New  England,  I,  151. 

24  Act  of  October  3,  1650.  See  also  Mass.  Colony  Records,  IV,  pt.  I,  p.  40. 

25  Johnson,  Wonder  Working  Providence,  24 7. 

26  Letter,  in  Mass.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  5th  series,  VIII,  65. 

27  Calendar  of  State  Papers,  Colonial,  V,  America  and  the  West  Indies  (1661-1668), 

P-  346. 

28  Ibid.,  IX  (1675-1676),  p.  221. 


44 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


which  was  exported  from  Connecticut  ports  to  Boston.  As  early  as  1644 
the  general  court  at  Hartford  took  steps  to  secure  better  marketing  condi¬ 
tions  for  Connecticut  grain.  Prices  were  low  and  the  Massachusetts  Bay 
and  Plymouth  Colony  farmers  were  complaining  of  the  Connecticut  competi¬ 
tion.  Consequently  the  court  granted  a  monopoly  of  the  export  of  grain  to 
a  number  of  merchants  who  were  to  endeavor  to  find  a  foreign  market  for  it.29 

The  period  of  grain  surplus  in  New  England  was  short,  for  the  blast  which 
began  to  affect  the  wheat  crop  after  1664  had  seriously  lessened  the  wheat 
exports  from  Connecticut  by  1680.  The  Indian  war  of  1674-1676  caused  a 
decrease  in  grain  production.  Many  farmers  were  kept  under  arms  and  a 
number  of  settlements  in  the  Connecticut  Valley  were  temporarily  aban¬ 
doned.30  In  Connecticut  the  scarcity  of  grain  resulting  from  the  war  was 
so  serious  that  exports  were  prohibited  except  under  special  license.31  At 
this  time  grain  imports  from  Virginia  were  resumed.32 

The  period  1675-1680  marks  the  end  of  the  export  of  New  England  grain. 
New  competitors  began  to  enter  the  West  India  markets.  Hudson  Valley 
wheat  was  being  shipped  regularly  and  in  considerable  quantities  be¬ 
fore  1 680, 33  and  by  1690  the  colonists  in  Pennsylvania  and  New 
Jersey  were  sending  wheat,  not  only  to  the  West  Indies  but  to  New  England 
itself.34  Wheat  and  wheat  products,  flour,  and  ship  bread,  are  still  mentioned 
among  New  England  exports  after  1680,  but  should  be  regarded  as  chiefly 
reexports  of  wheat  from  the  Middle  Colonies.35 

The  exports  of  horses  and  salted  meat  from  New  England,  which  also 
began  about  1650,  continued  not  only  throughout  the  seventeenth  but  even 
to  the  end  of  the  eighteenth  century,  indicating  a  greater  adaptability  of  that 
region  to  grazing  than  to  tillage.  In  1660  Samuel  Maverick  spoke  of  many 
thousand  “  Neate  Beasts  and  Hoggs  ”  being  slaughtered  every  year  for  export 
to  Newfoundland,  Barbados,  Jamaica,  and  for  provisioning  ships.36  The 
export  of  provisions  is  a  subject  of  frequent  mention  in  the  official  reports 
from  New  England  after  1665.37 

New  England  horses  were  much  in  demand  in  the  West  Indies  not  only 
for  riding  but  also  for  furnishing  motive  power  for  the  sugar-mills.  Connecti¬ 
cut  horses  were  known  as  the  best  in  New  England.  They  were  shipped 
from  Norwich,  New  London,  and  New  Haven.  Horses  were  exported  also 
from  Boston,  Salem,  and  Providence.  The  importance  of  the  trade  is  shown 
by  the  early  attempts  to  subject  it  to  legislative  control.  Massachusetts,  in 
1649,  fearing  lest  its  breeding  stock  should  be  weakened,  forbade  the  export 

29  Connecticut  Colony  Public  Records,  I,  116. 

30  See  Mathews,  Expansion  of  New  England,  56-58. 

31  Connecticut  Colony  Public  Records,  II,  270. 

32  Calendar  of  State  Papers,  Colonial  Series,  IX,  America  and  the  West  Indies  (1675- 

1676),  p.  366. 

33  See  p.  45. 

34  See  Letter  of  Dr.  More  in  Myers’s  Narratives,  290;  Scot,  East  New  Jersey,  I,  270; 

Letters  from  Pennsylvania,  in  Penn.  Magazine  of  History,  IV  (1880),  pp.  194,  199. 

35  Lord  Cornbury  complained  to  the  Board  of  Trade  in  1708  that  the  New  Englanders 

bought  wheat  in  New  York  with  clipped  money,  carried  it  home,  ground  and  bolted 
it,  and  sold  the  flour  to  the  West  Indies.  See  N.  Y.  Documents  Relative  to  Colonial 
History,  V,  58. 

36  Brief e  Description  of  New  England,  4 7. 

37  See  Calendar  of  State  Papers,  Colonial  Series,  V,  America  and  the  West  Indies 

(1661-1668),  and  later  volumes. 


TRADE  IN  AGRICULTURAL  PRODUCTS 


45 


of  mares.  In  Connecticut  a  law  of  1660, 38  in  order  to  prevent  shipment  of 
stolen  animals,  provided  that  all  horses  should  be  registered  with  “  the  marks 
both  naturall  and  artificiall,  as  also  the  colour  and  age  of  ye  beast  ”  with  the 
authorities  of  the  town  from  which  they  came. 

TRADE  OF  THE  MIDDLE  COLONIES. 

The  Middle  Colonies,  as  we  have  seen,  shipped  some  grain  to  New  Eng¬ 
land,  but  their  principal  market  was  the  Dutch,  French,  and  English  islands 
in  the  West  Indies.  Thither  were  shipped  principally  wheat  and  horses. 
The  shipment  of  wheat  from  New  Netherland  to  the  West  Indies  is  chron¬ 
icled  by  Jogues  39  in  1643,  who  wrote : 

“  Shortly  before  I  arrived  there,  three  large  ships  of  three  hundred  tons  each  had 
come  to  load  wheat;  two  found  cargoes,  the  third  could  not  be  loaded,  because  the 
savages  had  burnt  a  part  of  the  grain.  These  ships  had  come  from  the  West  Indies, 
where  the  West  India  Company  usually  keeps  up  seventeen  ships  of  war.” 

Denton  (1670)  40  records  exports  of  wheat  as  well  as  of  horses,  beef,  pork,  . 
pease,  and  tobacco  from  New  York,  and  a  few  years  later  (1678),  Governor 
Andros 41  estimated  the  wheat  exports  from  New  York  at  60,000  bushels 
yearly.  New  Jersey  and  Pennsylvania  seem  to  have  had  a  surplus  of  wheat 
almost  from  the  very  first  years  of  their  settlement.  Scot 42  says  of  East 
New  Jersey : 

“  This  with  the  Province  of  New  York ,  being  the  Granary  or  Store  house  of  the  West 
Indies,  without  which  Barbadoes  and  the  Leeward  Islands  could  not  subsist;  Yea,  New 
England  is  forced  to  come  there  every  year  for  Corn.” 

Horses  seem  to  have  been  the  first  commodity  exported  from  Penn’s 
colony,43  but  in  a  few  years  it  had  a  surplus  of  grain,  also,  for  export.  The 
general  nature  of  the  export  trade  of  Pennsylvania  and  its  connection  with 
farming  is  expressed  in  a  letter  of  an  early  settler  (1691)  : 44 

“  The  Country-men  finding  the  profit  now  coming  in,  do  clear  away  the  Woods,  Plow 
and  improve  their  Lands  in  Corn,  Hemp  and  Flax,  and  enlarge  themselves  in  great  stocks 
of  Horses,  Oxen,  Cows,  Hogs,  and  some  Sheep,  so  that  they  can,  and  do  now  spare 
great  quantities  of  Corn  to  our  Neighbour  Provinces,  which  formerly  we  were  forc’d 
to  be  beholding  to,  the  Merchants  making  great  Merchandizes,  viz.  for  the  West  Indies. 

I  understand  Ten  or  Twelve  Sail  went  loaden  thither  the  last  Summer  with  Bisket, 
Flower,  Beef  and  Pork.” 

THE  MARKET  FOR  AGRICULTURAL  PRODUCTS 

IN  THE  TOWNS. 

The  three  chief  centers  of  internal  trade  in  farm  products  were  Boston, 
Philadelphia,  and  New  York.  From  these  ports  shipments  were  made  to  the 
West  Indies  and  merchant  and  fishing  fleets  were  provisioned.  Boston,  with 
about  7,000  inhabitants,45  was  the  largest  urban  center  in  the  colonies.  The 

38  Connecticut  Colony  Public  Records,  I,  356. 

39  In  Jameson’s  Narratives,  260. 

40  Brief  Description  of  New  York,  3. 

41  O’Callaghan,  Documentary  History  of  New  York,  I,  90. 

42  In  N.  J.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  I,  270. 

43  Penn,  Letter  to  the  Free  Society  of  Traders  (1683),  in  Myers’s  Narratives,  229. 

44  Letters  from  Pennsylvania,  in  Pennsylvania  Magazine  of  History,  IV  (1880),  p.  200. 

45  Winsor,  Memorial  History  of  Boston,  II,  492. 


46 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


population  was  mostly  engaged  in  maritime  pursuits,  but  included  also  some 
farmers.  For  example,  the  tax  list  of  1687  shows  177  cows  kept  within  the 
limits  of  the  city  proper,  not  including  those  in  the  outlying  farms  of  Chelsea 
and  Brookline.46  There  are  many  indications  that  the  Boston  market  was  an 
important  factor  in  the  agriculture  of  the  surrounding  settlements.  Its  stimu¬ 
lating  influence  was  apparent  as  early  as  1632.  In  the  Plymouth  Colony, 
where  the  new  immigration  caused  the  price  of  corn  and  cattle  to  rise,  “  by 
which  many  were  much  inriched,  and  commodities  grue  plentifull,”  47  this 
trade  was  not  regarded  as  an  unmixed  blessing.  It  caused  dispersion  of 
population.48 

“  For  now  as  their  stocks  increased,  and  the  increse  vendible  ther  was  no  longer  any 
holding  them  togeather,  but  now  they  must  of  necessitie  goe  to  their  great  lots,  they 
could  not  other  wise  keep  their  katle.” 

Beef  cattle  were  an  important  item  in  the  trade  of  Boston  with  neighbour¬ 
ing  towns.  Johnson  49  wrote  of  Ipswich,  1650: 

“  the  Lord  hath  been  pleased  to  increase  them  in  Corne  and  Cattell  of  late ;  Insomuch 
that  they  have  many  hundred  quarters  to  spare  yearly,  and  feed,  at  the  latter  end  of 
Summer,  the  Towne  of  Boston  with  good  Beefe  :  ” 

The  cost  of  transportation  of  corn  overland  was  so  high  that  for  many 
years  there  was  little  trade  in  that  commodity  with  the  back  country.  Of 
Sudbury,  19  miles  west  of  Boston,  Johnson  50  remarked  (1650)  :  “the  great 
distance  it  lyes  from  the  Mart  Towns  maketh  it  burdensome  to  the  Inhabi¬ 
tants  to  bring  their  corne  so  far  by  land,”  and  the  same  complaint 51  was 
made  regarding  Andover  (20  miles  from  Boston,  15  miles  from  Salem).  A 
few  years  later,  however,  Maverick  52  describes  the  trade  between  Rehoboth 
and  Boston  as  follows : 

“  It  is  not  aboue  40  Miles  from  Boston,  betweene  which  there  is  a  Comone  trade,  carry¬ 
ing  &  recarrying  goods  by  land  in  Cart  and  on  Horseback,  and  they  have  a  very  fayre 
conveyance  of  goods  by  water  also.” 

In  the  same  work  are  mentioned  a  number  of  towns  which  supplied  Boston 
with  firewood  and  building  materials. 

MARKETS  AND  FAIRS. 

New  York  had  less  than  4,500  people  in  1700  53  and  Philadelphia  about 
5,ooo.54  The  trade  of  these  cities  with  the  surrounding  country  districts 
seems  to  have  been  principally  in  beef  cattle.  Under  Dutch  rule  two  fairs  had 
been  established  to  be  held  annually  in  New  Amsterdam,  on  October  15  for 
cattle  and  on  November  1  for  hogs,55  and  in  1656  a  market  space  was  set 

46  Boston,  Reports  of  the  Records,  First  Report,  91  et  seq. 

47  Bradford,  Plymouth  Plantations,  293. 

48  Loc.  cit. 

49  Wonder  Working  Providence,  96. 

50  Ibid.,  196. 

51  Ibid.,  249. 

52  Brief  Description  of  New  England  (1660),  p.  44. 

63  O’Callaghan,  Documentary  History  of  New  York,  I,  691,  gives  the  census  figure  for. 
^  1703  as  4,436. 

54  Scharf  and  Westcott,  Philadelphia,  I,  140. 

55  De  Voe,  Market  Book,  17. 


TRADE  IN  AGRICULTURAL  PRODUCTS 


47 


aside  and  a  weekly  market  was  provided  for  by  the  governor.66  The  growth 
of  trade  was  rapid  enough  to  require  the  establishment  of  six  other  market 
places  before  1700.57  Livestock  were  driven  to  the  New  York  market  from 
Long  Island  and  New  Jersey68  and  from  a  number  of  towns  in  western 
Connecticut.  In  1659,  when  a  new  cattle  market  was  established  notices  were 
sent  to  towns  as  far  distant  as  Southold  on  Long  Island  and  Milford  in  Con¬ 
necticut.69  The  consumption  of  fresh  meat  in  New  York  was  increasing 
rapidly  toward  the  end  of  the  seventeenth  century.  In  1684,  according  to  the 
city  records,  not  more  than  400  neat  cattle  were  killed  yearly  for  local  con¬ 
sumption  and  in  1698  about  3.000.60 

Fairs  and  markets  were  established  in  Philadelphia  in  the  early  years  of 
the  settlement.  Like  their  European  prototypes,  these  institutions  were  de¬ 
signed  to  bring  the  producers  and  consumers  together  under  conditions  of 
free  competition  and  to  prevent  abusive  practices  by  middlemen.  So  we  find 
in  Philadelphia  the  market  regulations  of  1693, 61  after  specifying  the  time 
and  place  where  markets  should  be  held,  provided : 

“  That  all  sorts  of  Provision  brought  to  this  town  to  sale,  viz,  flesh,  fish,  tame  fowl, 
eggs,  butter,  cheese,  herbs,  fruits,  roots,  etc.,  shall  be  sold  in  the  aforesaid  market  place, 
and  in  case  any  of  the  aforesaid  provisions  should  come  to  the  town  of  Philadelphia 
on  other  days  that  are  not  market  days,  yet  that  they  be  sold  in  the  market  under  the 
same  circumstances,  regulation,  and  forfeitures  as  upon  the  days  on  which  the  market  is 
appointed,  and  in  case  any  of  the  said  provisions  be  exposed  to  sale  in  any  other  place 
in  this  town,  then  the  said  market  shall  be  forfeited  the  one  half  to  the  poor  of  Phila¬ 
delphia,  the  other  half  to  the  clerk  of  the  market. 

“  That  the  market  begin  and  be  opened  at  the  ringing  of  the  bell,  which  shall  be  rung 
from  the  first  day  of  the  2nd  month,  April,  to  the  first  day  of  September  between  the 
hours  of  six  and  seven,  and  from  the  first  day  of  September  to  the  first  day  of  the 
second  month,  April,  between  the  hours  of  eight  and  nine,  and  in  case  any  of  the  afore¬ 
said  provision  or  any  sort  of  marketing  be  sold,  flesh  excepted  before  the  ringing  of  the 
bell,  unless  it  be  for  his  Excellency,  Governor  in  Chief,  or  Lieut.  Governor,  the  same 
shall  be  forfeited  one-half  to  the  poor,  the  other  to  the  clerk  of  the  market. 

“  That  no  person  cheapen  or  buy  any  of  the  afore  mentioned  provision  by  the  way 
as  it  comes  to  the  market,  upon  forfeiture  of  the  same,  besides  the  forfeiture  of  six 
shillings,  both  to  the  buyer  and  seller,  one-half  to  the  poor,  the  other  to  the  clerk  of 
the  market. 

“  That  no  hucksters  or  persons  to  sell  again  shall  buy  or  cheapen  any  of  the  afore 
mentioned  provision,  until  it  has  been  two  hours  in  the  market  after  the  ringing  of  the 
bell,  upon  forfeiture  of  the  same,  and  six  shillings,  one-half  to  the  poor,  the  other  half 
to  the  clerk  of  the  market/’ 

The  consumption  of  fresh  meat  in  Philadelphia  in  summer,  according  to 
Thomas  62  was  “  Twenty  Fat  Bullocks  every  Week  ....  besides  many 
Sheep,  Calves  and  Hogs.” 

In  New  England,  a  weekly  market  was  established  in  Hartford  in  1643, 63 
and  annual  fairs  were  held  in  Hartford,  New  Haven,  and  Providence.64  In 

56  Ibid.,  36. 

57  Ibid.,  44,  70,  77,  85,  109,  125. 

r’8  Danckaerts,  Journal,  157;  Scot,  in  N.  J.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  I,  313. 

59  De  Voe,  Market  Book,  38. 

60  Ibid.,  87. 

61  Reprinted  in  Pennsylvania  Magazine  of  History ,  XXIII  (1899-1900),  p.  408.  (The 

spelling,  capitalization,  etc.,  are  modernized.) 

62  Myers’s  Narratives,  318. 

63  Connecticut  Colony  Public  Records,  I,  91. 

6*New  Haven  Colony  Records,  I,  130;  Weeden,  Early  Rhode  Island,  120. 


48 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


Boston,  Thursday  was  appointed  as  a  weekly  market  day  in  1633,  and  in 
1696  Tuesdays  and  Saturdays  were  added.65  The  municipal  control  of  the 
sale  of  produce  does  not  seem  to  have  been  popular  either  among  the  city  or 
country  folks  there.  A  visitor  in  1709  66  reported: 

“  The  Town  of  Boston  is  plentifully  supply’d  with  good  and  wholesome  Provisions  of 
all  sorts,  not  inferior  to  those  in  England,  ....  but  though  the  Town  is  so  large  and 
populous,  they  could  never  be  brought  to  establish  a  Market  in  it,  notwithstanding 
several  of  their  Governours  have  taken  great  Pains  to  convince  the  Inhabitants  how 
useful  and  beneficial  it  would  be  to  ’em ;  but  the  Country  People  always  opposed  it,  so 
that  it  could  not  be  settled :  The  Reason  they  give  for  it  is,  if  Market  Days  where 
appointed,  all  the  Country  People  coming  in  at  the  same  Time  would  glut  it,  and  the 
Townspeople  would  buy  their  Provisions  for  what  they  pleased,  so  rather  chuse  to  send 
them  as  they  think  fit;  and  sometimes  a  tall  Fellow  brings  a  Turkey  or  Goose  to  sell, 
and  will  travel  through  the  whole  Town  to  see  who  will  give  most  for  it,  and  is  at 
last  sold  for  3  s.  6d.  or  4  s.  and  if  he  had  stay’d  at  Home,  he  could  have  earned  a  Crown 
by  his  Labour,  which  is  the  customary  Price  for  a  Day’s  Work:  ” 


65  Weeden,  Social  and  Economic  History  of  New  England,  I,  406. 

66  Uring,  Voyages  and  Travels,  hi. 


Chapter  V. — Land  Tenure. 

THE  LAND  SYSTEM  OF  NEW  ENGLAND. 

The  English  settlements  in  New  England,  with  the  exception  of  New 
Hampshire,  were  organized  as  corporate  colonies.  The  trading  companies 
by  which  they  were  established  and  governed  received  from  the  English 
Crown  extensive  grants  of  land,  which  they  in  turn  granted  to  individuals 
and  to  groups  of  settlers.  Grants  from  the  Crown  directly  to  individuals  were 
practically  unknown  in  New  England,  the  notable  exception  being  the  grant 
of  the  Province  of  Maine,  embracing  land  between  the  Piscataqua  and 
Kennebec  Rivers,  to  Sir  Ferdinando  Gorges  in  1639. 

The  land  policy  of  the  New  England  colonies  was  democratic  and  far¬ 
sighted.  Its  guiding  motive  was  not  profit,  but  methodical  occupation  of 
the  company’s  territory  by  actual  settlers  and  the  development  of  its  great 
resources,  not  for  the  benefit  of  a  few  but  in  the  interest  of  the  whole  com¬ 
munity.  Such  a  policy  necessarily  involved  “  great  restraint  upon  the  indi¬ 
vidual  wills  of  settlers,  with  a  view  to  the  greatest  safety  and  prosperity  of 

all . ”  1  Such  aims  are  apparent  not  only  in  the  plan  of  community 

settlement,  the  predominant  feature  of  the  New  England  land  system,  but 
also  in  the  rather  infrequent  grants  to  individuals. 

GRANTS  TO  INDIVIDUALS. 

In  Southern  New  England,  grants  by  the  colonial  authorities  directly  to 
individuals  were  rarely  of  large  areas,  and  in  the  aggregate  they  made  up 
but  a  small  part  of  the  total  disposable  area.  Egleston’s  2  investigations  show 
that  in  the  Massachusetts  Bay  Colony,  1631-1656,  there  were  about  100 
grants  to  individuals,  of  which  the  largest  was  3,200  acres ;  only  a  few 
exceeded  500  acres  and  the  majority  were  not  more  than  250  acres.  It  should 
be  noted,  also,  that  such  grants  to  individuals  were  uniformly  in  consideration 
either  of  services  already  rendered  to  the  community  or  of  services  expected  in 
the  future.  Thus  magistrates,  ministers,  and  school-teachers  were  compensated 
by  gifts  of  land  and  artisans  were  encouraged  to  set  up  saw  mills,  salt  works, 
and  manufactures  of  iron,  copper,  and  gunpowder. 

GRANTS  TO  COMMUNITIES. 

Most  of  the  area  of  New  England  was  settled  in  village  communities. 
Such  communities  were  usually  formed  by  the  splitting  off  of  a  number  of 
families  from  one  of  the  older  settlements.  The  first  step  was  for  a  group  of 
heads  of  families  to  secure  a  tract  of  unoccupied  land.  In  Massachusetts  a 

1  Egleston,  Land  System  of  the  New  England  Colonies ,  in  J.  H.  U.  Studies  in  Hist,  and 

Pol.  Sci.,  IV  (1886),  Nos.  11,  12,  p.  27. 

2  Ibid.,  p.  24. 


5 


49 


50 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


town  grant  was  usually  secured  from  the  general  court,  but  in  Rhode  Island 
and  Connecticut  the  lands  were  purchased  from  the  Indians  without  charter 
or  grant,  the  title  being  confirmed  later  by  royal  charters.  _ 

The  original  grantees  or  purchasers  were  known  as  proprietors.  Group 
settlements  were  the  rule  on  land  purchased  from  the  Indians  as  we  1  as  on 
town  grants.4  In  New  Haven,  Connecticut,  and  in  the  neighboring  settlements 
of  Guilford  and  Milford,  the  lands  “  were  purchased  by  their  principal  men, 
and  held  in  trust  for  the  people,  who,  after  contributing  to  pay  the  expenses 
of  surveying,  etc.,  drew  lots  proportioned  to  their  contributions.  The  lands 
of  the  earliest  settlements  on  the  Connecticut  River,  Hartford,  Wethersfield, 


Fig  i -Early  allotments  in  Wethersfield,  1640-41. .  (From  Andrews,  River  Towns  of 
Connecticut  in  Johns  Hopkins  University  Studies  m  Hist,  and  Pol.  Set.,  vol.  VI  , 

Nos.  7-9,  p.  5-) 

The  above  represents  the  lands  recorded  under  date  1640-41-  On  the  extreme  ei 
are  the  West  Fields ;  on  the  right,  across  the  river,  Naubuc  Farms,  v^ious 

Three-Mile  Purchase;  in  the  center  the  Great  Meadow  and  Plain  with  their  various 
divisions.  The  latter  allotments  can  not  in  every  case  be  absolutely  ascertained,  as  t 
records  are  often  vague  and  faulty. 

and  Windsor,  were  similarly  purchased  from  the  natives.6  In  order  to  pre¬ 
vent  overlapping  of  purchases  and  confusion  of  titles,  purchases  from  *  e 
natives  were  soon  subjected  to  the  control  of  the  colonial  authorities.  In 

3  Egleston,  in  J.  H.  U.  Studies  in  Hist,  and  Pol  Sci.,  IV  (1886)  ,  Nos  11,  12,  p.  9- 

4  The  Narragansett  country  in  Rhode  Island  was  an  exception  .SeTe, { 

N arragansett  Planters  in  J.  H.  U.  Studies  in  Hist,  and  Pol.  Sci.f  V  (  )>  •  3> 

6.  Connecticut,  in  J.  H.  U.  Studies  in  Hist,  and  Pol.  Sci.,  VII 

(1889),  Nos.  7-9,  PP-  32-36. 


LAND  TENURE 


51 

New  Haven  it  was  ordered  (1639)  “that  no  planter  or  planters  shall  make 
purchase  of  any  lands  or  plantation  from  the  Indians  or  others  for  their 
own  private  use  or  advantage,  but  in  the  name  and  for  the  use  of  the  whole 
plantation.  7  (Spelling  modernized.)  Similar  laws  were  later  passed  in  the 
Connecticut  and  Rhode  Island  colonies.8 

LAYING  OUT  THE  TOWN  ;  THE  HOME  LOTS. 

The  tract  on  which  settlement  was  to  be  made,  known  as  the  “town 
grant,  varied  in  area  from  4  to  10  square  miles.  Near  the  center  of  the 


Fig.  2.  Map  of  Watertown,  Massachusetts,  1636.  (From  Maclear,  Early  New  England 

Towns,  81.) 


grant  a  village  was  laid  out.  The  site  for  the  village  green  and  meeting-house, 
otten  a  hilltop,  was  first  determined  and  then  streets  were  laid  out,  and  on 
both  sides  of  the  streets  were  set  off  the  house-lots  of  the  settlers.  The  order 
for  the  lading  out  of  Yarmouth,  Maine  (1681),  was  as  follows: 


That  ten  acres  of  plain  land  be  laid  out  in  a  square  lot  for  a  meeting  house  burial 
place,  minister  s  house  lot,  market  place  and  school;  around  this  ten  acre  lot,  a  street  four 
rods  wide,  and  on  this  street,  house  lots  of  half  an  acre  each,  and  in  some  convenient 
place,  a  common  field  equal  to  six  acres  to  each  house  lot.” 


7  Colony  Records,  27. 

#Se<n  Colo-vy  Publlc  Records,  I  (1663),  p.  402;  Rhode  Island  Records,  I  (1658), 
p.  403*  v  7  1 

9  Russell,  History  of  North  Yarmouth,  in  Maine  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  1st  series,  II,  172. 


52 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


The  home  lots  were  plots  of  ground  “  sufficient  for  a  dwelling  house  and 
outbuildings,  a  door  yard  and  garden,  with  perhaps  a  small  inclosure  fo 
feeding  cattle  or  raising  corn.”  10  They  varied  in  size  from  town  to  town  and 
were  not  uniform  even  within  the  same  town.  The  smallest  were  sometimes 
only  one-quarter  acre,  from  this  they  increased  to  6  8,  or  10  acres.  In  a 
few  towns  home  lots  of  20  and  even  30  acres  are  found. 


DIVISION  OF  UPLANDS  AND  MEADOWS. 

The  next  step  was  the  division  of  the  arable  and  mowing  lands,  the  so- 
called  “  uplands  and  meadows.”  Large  fields  of  several  hundred  acres  each 
were  roughly  surveyed  and  then  divided  into  strips  which  were  numbered 
and  distributed  among  the  settlers  by  lot.  Each  settler’s  portion  was,  there- 
fore,  actually  a  “  lot.”  The  maps  of  land  distribution  in  the  ancient  towns 

show  a  remarkable  regularity  of  arrangement.12 


“  The  small  oblong  strips  are,  in  nearly  every  case,  grouped  together  in  a  few  lo  g 
rows  or  tiers.  These  tiers  are  often  parallel,  but  sometimes  one  tier  will  be  at  right  angles 
to  another.  The  cause  of  this  regularity  is  that  the  strips  or  lots  are  laid  off  from  on 
or  two  (sometimes  more,  according  to  the  size  of  the  field),  mam  base  lines,  usually 
a  river  or  highway ;  each  field  is  thus  a  parallelogram  divided  into  tiers  of  small,  usually 

equal,  parallelograms.” 


A  rather  striking  case  of  the  early  use  of  the  rectilinear  survey,  later 
adopted  in  our  national  land  system,  is  found  in  Cohasset,  Massachusetts 

(1670)  : 13 

“  The  town  was  originally  laid  out,  as  near  as  might  be,  in  Squares,  whose  sides  should 
be  one  mile.  It  was  divided  into  four  parts,  called  divisions,  by  lines  _  running  nearly 
east  and  west,  the  whole  length  of  the  town,  each  division  being  a  mile  in  width,  i  hese 
divisions  were  separated  into  parts  or  squares,  by  lines  one  mile  from  each  other,  running 
at  right-angles  with  the  lines  of  divisions.  It  was  intended  by  the  proprietors  of  Cono- 
hasset,  that  roads,  if  possible,  should  run  with  the  lines  which  marked  the  divisions  and 
squares,  and  spaces  of  land  for  that  purpose  were  accordingly  left.  But  when  the  roads 
were  really  made,  it  was  found  necessary  to  vary  much  from  the  original  design,  owing 
to  the  immoveable  rocks  and  other  obstructions,  falling  in  the  way. 


THE  RULE  OF  DISTRIBUTION. 


The  quantity  of  land  allotted  to  each  proprietor  was  determined  by  a  rule 
of  distribution  which  was  in  many  cases  agreed  to  in  advance  of  settlement. 
The  home  lots  were  occasionally  of  equal  size,14  but  in  the  distribution  of 
other  land  holdings  the  right  of  some  to  receive  more  than  others  was  invari¬ 
ably  recognized.  There  were  two  criteria  of  distribution:  (i)  the  invest¬ 
ment  of  the  settler  in  the  original  enterprise,  and  (2)  his  ability  to  use  land. 
Under  the  first  were  included  his  contribution  to  the  expense  of  removal 


10  Adams,  Origin  of  Salem  Plantation,  in  Essex  Institute  Historical  Collections,  XIX 

11  See  examples ^given  by  Egleston,  in  J.  H.  U.  Studies  in  Hist,  and  Pol.  Sci.,  IV  (1886), 

Nos  11  12  p  52;  MacLear,  Early  New  England  Towns,  in  Columbia  University 

Studies’™  Pol.  Sci.,  XX IX  (1908),  No.  1,  p.  81  .  . 

12  Ford,  Colonial  Precedents  of  Our  National  Land  System,  in  Wisconsin  University 

Bulletin,  History  Series,  II  (1909-10),  p.  12.  .  ,  • 

13  Flint,  History  and  Description  of  Cohasset,  in  Mass.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  3d  series. 

14  Temole^nd  Sheldon.  Northdeld,  66;  Temple,  JVhately,  16. 


LAND  TENURE 


53 


from  England  or  to  the  purchase  of  the  land  from  the  Indians  and  the  cost 
of  surveying  it.  The  second  criterion  was  based  on  the  value  of  the  planter’s 
estate,  and  m  some  cases  also  upon  the  number  of  heads  in  his  family. 
In  the  determination  of  the  amount  of  a  man’s  estate,  not  merely  a  valuation 
of  his  property  was  taken  into  consideration,  but  also  his  contribution  past 
or  prospective,  to  the  success  of  the  joint  enterprise.  It  should  be  noted  also 

that  the  roll  of  estates  was  used  as  a  basis  of  taxation,  as  well  as  of  land 
distribution,15  so  that 


''wealthy  planters  consented  to  receive  less  than  their  proper  share  of  lands,  and  were 
held  to  pay  less  than  their  ratable  proportion  of  expenses;  while  the  young  man  for 

Z  phiUationTaxes!”  *  **  aH°tment  °f  ^  agrCCd  t0  W  a  ProP-tionate  part  of 


. In  Guilford,  Connecticut,  the  planters  were  first  divided  into  four  classes 
viz.:  those  of  £50,  £100,  £250,  and  £500  estates,16  and  then  it  was  ordered 

“  that  all  lands  shall  from  time  to  time  be  allotted  or  divided,  unto  all  and  every  of  the 
Iilanters  here,  both  according  to  his  or  their  estates  put  in,  and  according  to  the  number 
of  heads  in  each  family,  viz— for  every  hundred  pound  estate,  five  acres  of  upland  and 
six  acres  of  meadow,  and  for  every  head  three  acres  of  upland  and  half  an  acre  of 
meadow  and  so  proportionably  for  fifty  pounds  estate,  none  being  reckoned  for  such 
heads  to  any  man  but  himself,  his  wife  and  children.” 


In  Northampton,17  20  acres  of  meadow  were  allotted  to  each  £100  of  estate 
and  in  addition  each  head  of  a  family  received  15  acres  and  3  acres  for  each 
son  In  New  Haven,  at  the  first  division  of  land,  the  rate  was  5  acres  for 
each  £100,  and  2\  acres  for  each  person  in  the  planter’s  family.18 
.  principle  that  those  should  have  most  land  who  could  make  best  use  of 

it  is  clearly  expressed  in  the  following  town  vote  in  Springfield,  Massachu¬ 
setts  (1636)  : 19 


It  is  agreed  that  after  this  day  we  shall  observe  this  rule  about  dividinge  of  plantinge 
ground  and  meddowe  in  all  plantinge  ground  to  regard  chiefly  persons  who  are  most  apt 
to  use  such  ground :  and  in  all  meddowe  and  pasture  to  regard  chiefly  Cattell  and 
estate,  because  estate  is  like  to  be  imp’vd  in  cattell,  and  such  ground  is  aptest  for  theyr 

shall  lnd/l  WGfhagre,u  ^  n0G  P’f n  that  iS  maStCr  °f  a  l0tt  thou^h  he  have  cattyle 
nr  virJ  iT  °f  m°Wmge  ground  :  and  ™ne  that  have  cowes,  steeres 

akers  and  thU  nrf  ^  apieCe  and  a11  h°rSeS  not  less  than  fower 

ers  and  this  order  in  dividing  meddowe  by  cattyle  to  take  place  the  last  of  May  next.” 


RELATIVE  SIZE  OF  ALLOTMENTS. 


The  working  out  of  the  rules  outlined  above  caused  some  inequalities, 
but  in  general  the  allotments  before  1700  produced  a  fairly  even  distribution  of 
land.  In  Hartford,20  Connecticut,  the  first  distribution  (1640),  was  of  3,311 
acres  among  121  proprietors,  giving  each  on  the  average  27  acres.  The  larg- 
est  farm  granted  was  160  acres ;  41  grants  were  from  1  to  10  acres  and  70 
grants  from  1  to  20  acres.  In  New  Haven,  Connecticut,  we  have  more  com- 
plete  records  of  the  distribution.  Soon  after  the  settlement  of  the  colony 


15  Temple,  Whately,  16. 

16  Town  Records,  in  Steiner’s  Guilford,  49. 

17  Trumbull,  Northampton,  I,  22. 

18  Colony  Records,  192. 

l°w *  Records,  in  Burt’s  First  Century  of  Springfield ,  I,  158 
Hartford  Town  Votes,  in  Conn.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  VI,  22-24. 


54 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


in  1638  house  lots  were  apportioned,  and  in  January  1640  land  was  distrib¬ 
uted  of’  three  different  kinds,  upland,  land  in  the  neck,  and  meadow,  1.  e„ 
salt  marsh  According  to  the  rule  of  division  agreed  upon,  each  proprie  or 
received  of  upland,  5  acres  for  each  £100  of  his  estate  and l  2*  acres  for  each 
person  in  his  family ;  of  meadow,  5  acres  for  each  £100  of  estate  and  -§  acre 
for  each  head ;  and  of  land  in  the  neck,  an  acre  for  every  £100  and  a  half  acre 

f°TheC  result  was  to  give  to  the  123  grantees  average  allotments  of  23 ^acres 
of  upland,  4i  acres  in  the  neck,  and  i6J  acres  of  salt  marsh.  In  October  of 
the  same  year  a  second  division  of  8,151  acres  of  upland  was  made  whtch 
Yielded  average  allotments  of  66  acres  each,  bringing  up  the  total  °f  the 
average  holding  in  four  parcels  to  no  acres.22  There  was  of  course  conside  - 
able  disparity  in  the  holdings.  Some  were  as  low  as  10  acres,  while  the  hig 
est  share  was  close  to  1,000  acres,  but  on  the  whole  a  considerable  degree 
of  equality  prevailed.  There  were  only  9  persons  whose  allotments  were 
above  300  acres  and  34  whose  holdings  ranged  from  100  to  300  acres 

In  Hadley,  Massachusetts,  the  original  distribution  was  according  to 
estates,  no  account  being  taken  of  the  size  of  families.  Each  proprietor  re¬ 
ceived  an  8-acre  home  lot  and  in  addition  25}  acres  of  meadow  for  each  £ioc 
of  estate;  7  lots  of  meadow,  aggregating  1,578  acres,  were  distributed  among 
48  proprietors,  giving  to  each  7  parcels  totalling,  in  the  average,  33  acres. 
The  wealthiest  proprietors  (10)  received  the  maximum  amount,  50.,  acres , 
17  received  amounts  from  26  to  40  acres;  and  21  got  from  10  to  25  acres. 

TENDENCIES  TOWARD  CONCENTRATION  OF  LAND 

HOLDINGS. 

Through  purchase,  marriage,  and  inheritance,  proprietary  rights  tended  to 
accumulate  in  a  few  hands,  with  the  result  that  later  distributions  of  lands 
particularly  those  of  the  eighteenth  century,  showed  more  inequality,  cu 
even  before  1700  the  tendency  to  the  concentration  of  land  m  fewer^  hands 
was  evident.  In  1650  the  general  court  of  Connecticut  noted  2Mhat  there 
is  creeping  in,  in  severall  Townes  and  plantations  within  this  Jurisdiction, 
a  great  abuse  of  buying  and  purchasing  Home  Lotts  and  laying  them  to¬ 
gether,  by  meanes  whereof  great  depopulations  are  like  to  follow,  ..  .  .  . 
The  towns  attempted  to  prevent  the  accumulation  of  land  holdings  m  a  few 
hands,  and  at  the  same  time  tried  to  protect  themselves  against  the  intrusion 
of  unwelcome  associates  by  imposing  restrictions  on  the  alienation  of  land. 
In  Springfield  it  was  voted  (1638) 

“  that  no  man  that  is  possessed  of  a  lot  by  the  dispose  of  the  Plantation,  shall  after  sell 
it  to  another,  of  the  Plantation,  that  has  a  lot  already ;  neither  shall  any  man  Possess 
two  men’s  Lots,  without  the  consent  of  the  Plantation  or  such  as  shall  be  appointed,  till 
they  have  been  inhabitants  five  years  in  the  Plantation:  But  If  any  desire  to  sell  his 
Lots,  he  may  to  a  (stranger),  provided  the  said  Plantation  shall  not  disallow  of  the 

22  The^ table^o ^allotments  to  each  proprietor  is  given  in  New  Haven  Colony  Records, 

I,  91-93. 

23  Judd,  Hadley,  26,  30. 

Is Town  Recordin' Burt's* °First  Century  of  Springfield,  I,  164.  (Spelling  modernized.) 


LAND  TENURE 


55 


said  Stranger.  But  in  case  they  shall  not  allow  the  admission  of  the  said 
the  Plantation  shall  buy  the  said  lots  as  indifferent  men  shall  apprise  them.” 


stranger  then 


In  general,  during  the  early  years  the  consent  of  the  town  was  necessary 
for  the  sale  of  lots,  and  in  the  case  of  contemplated  sale  to  non-residents 
the  town  reserved  the  right  of  preemption.26 

•The  task  of  the  committees  in  charge  of  distribution  was  arduous.  In¬ 
equalities  inevitably  arose,  some  lots  being  more  desirable  than  others  be¬ 
cause  of  greater  fertility  or  of  nearness  to  the  village.  In  order  to  secure 
equality  the  fields  were  sometimes  minutely  subdivided,  each  grantee  re¬ 
ceiving  a  number  of  small  strips  in  various  portions  of  the  field.  In  other 
cases  an  additional  quantity  of  land  was  granted  to  compensate  for  poor 
quality.  In  general,  the  records  of  distribution  show  an  admirable  spirit  of 
i airness  and  willingness  to  remedy  injustices. 


THE  COMMON  FIELDS — PROPRIETORS  COMMONS. 

The  allotments  were  not  fenced  separately,  but  instead  they  were  sur¬ 
rounded  by  a  common  fence,  to  the  construction  and  maintenance  of  which 
each  proprietor  contributed  in  proportion  to  his  allotment.  Each  proprietor 
cultivated  his  own  lot  or  lots,  subject  to  restrictions  on  the  choice  of  crops 
and  the  dates  of  planting  and  harvesting.  In  New  Haven  it  was  ordered 
( 1640)  thatt  after  this  yeare  none  shall  plant  Indian  corne  in  the  neck 
butt  onely  sow  itt  with  English.”  22  In  1647  the  town  authorities  were  peti¬ 
tioned  to  regulate  crops  grown  in  the  common  fields,  but  refused,  referring 
the  matter  to  the  grantees  for  decision  among  themselves.28  The  custom  of 
admitting  the  cattle  to  graze  on  the  stubble  after  the  crop  had  been  harvested 
made  a  common  crop  policy  inevitable.  In  the  early  days  most  of  the 
improved  land  of  the  community  was  inclosed  in  common  fields,  but  as  hold- 
mgs  were  consolidated  by  purchase,  separate  inclosures  became  practicable  29 
The  proprietors  continued  to  pasture  their  cattle  in  common  long  after  the 
tillage  fields  had  become  separately  inclosed.30 


TOWN  COMMONS. 


.  It  is  important  to  realize  that  the  common  fields  so  far  described  whether 
in  tillage  or  pastured,  were  not  accessible  to  all  the  inhabitants  of  ihe  town 
They  were  common  ”  only  to  the  original  proprietors,  and  to  those  persons 
who  through  purchase,  marriage,  or  inheritance  had  acquired  proprietary 
rights  therein.  They  were  known,  therefore,  as  “proprietors’  commons” 
in  addition,  however,  there  were  other  fields  which  were  open  to  the  use 
of  all  the  inhabitants,  the  “  town  commons.”  They  included  all  the  land 
of  the  original  grant  not  yet  divided  among  the  proprietors  nor  allotted 
to  later  corners.  On  such  common  fields  any  inhabitant  might  pasture  his 
animals,  and  from  such  tracts  wood,  stone  and  earth  were  taken,  subject  to 


*CRhode  Island  Records,  1,  126;  Hartford  Town  Voles  (1635),  in  Conn  Hist 
Collechons,  VI,  1;  Steiner,  Guilford,  50.  n'  Hlst' 

7  Colony  Records.  48. 

28  Ibid.,  367. 

See  Pai£e’  Ca.mbrid9e  (Massachusetts),  36. 
hor  a  discussion  of  common  pastures  see  pp.  21—23. 


Soc. 


56 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


regulations  by  the  town  authorities.  Later  distributions  of  land  were  a 
out  of  town  commons,  not  only  to  proprietors  but  to  new  inhabitants  as  we  . 
Often  the  newcomers  had  already  “  squatted  ”  on  the  undivided  lands  and 
the  distribution  of  land  to  them  was  in  the  nature  of  formal  recognition  of 
their  title.  In  Cambridge  we  find,31  in  the  allotment  of  1689,  those  inhab 
tants  who  had  “  no  rights  in  the  land  but  who  had  settled  there  were  to  have 
a  share  amounting  to  12  acres,  more  or  less  apiece.  In  Salem,  also,  the 
were  many  squatters  living  on  the  undivided  land.  “  Many  of  this  class 
had  been  servants  who,  gradually  acquiring  a  little  money  obtained  from  t 
town  the  privilege  of  building  upon  the  undivided  land  by  paying  to  the 
town  a  small  rent.32  In  Hartford,  Connecticut,  certain  cottagers  were 
granted  lots  to  have  only  at  The  Towns  Courtesy  with  hbe'ty  o  e  c 
wood  and  keep  swine  or  cows  by  proportion  on  the  common. 

COMMONERS  AND  NON-COMMONERS. 

The  commoners,  or  proprietors,  constituted  a  privileged  group  in  the 
town.  They  were  “  the  original  grantees  or  purchasers  of  the  land  of  the 
town  and  their  legal  heirs,  assigns,  or  successors,  with  such  as  from  time 
to  time  they  chose  to  add  to  their  number.”  34  They  were  a  land  commum  y 
within  a  political  community,  controlling  not  only  the  management  of  t 
proprietors’  commons,  but  also  the  distribution  of  the  undivided i  lands, 
which  were  used  in  common  by  all  the  inhabitants.  At  first  when  e  pro¬ 
prietors  constituted  almost  the  entire  population,  there  could  be  no  senou 
conflict  between  them  and  the  later  arrivals,  for  the  land  commumty  ai  d 
the  political  community  were  practically  identical.  It  made  little  di  erenc  ’ 
then,  whether  the  management  of  the  common  fields  was  d‘r<*ted  by 
town  meeting  or  by  the  meeting  of  proprietors.  In  Wethersfield  nearly  all 
the  business  relating  to  land  was  done  in  town  meeting  So  also  in  the 
towns  in  New  Haven  Colony  and  in  many  towns  in  Massachusetts.  In 
Rhode  Island  boards  of  proprietors  appear  at  an  early  date.  °  But  as  the 
•  settlement  grew  by  influx  of  outsiders  the  non-commoners  came  to  equal 
and  finally  to  surpass  the  proprietors  in  numbers.  In  the  gathering  of  the 
political  community,  the  town  meeting,  the  newcomers  struggled  hard  to 
wrest  from  the  proprietors  the  control  over  the  land.  Such  struggles  became 
frequent  before  1700  and  occupied  a  large  place  in  the  histories  of  the  town 
in  the  next  century.  Eventual  adjustment  of  the  difficulty  occurred  in  one 
of  three  ways:36  (i)  by  increasing  the  number  of  commoners,  (2)  by 
granting  certain  lands  to  newcomers  without  accompanying  rights  of  com¬ 
monage-  or  (3)  by  inclusion  of  the  newcomers  with  the  original  proprietors 
in  a  general  division  of  lands  to  all  the  inhabitants,  but  granting  no  right 
to  non-commoners  in  further  divisions.  _ _ 

31  MacLear,  in  Columbia  Univ.  Studies  in  Political  Science ,  XXIX  (1908),  No.  1,  p.  86. 

32  Ibid.,  p.  102.  .  _  „  ,,T 

33  Hartford  Town  Votes ,  in  Conn.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  VI,  19* 

34  Osgood,  American  Colonies,  I,  461. 

35  Ibid.,  American  Colonies,  I,  464-  >T 

36  Egleston,  J.  H.  U.  Studies  in  Hist,  and  Pol.  Sci.,  IV  (1886),  Nos.  11,  12,  p.  41. 


LAND  TENURE 


57 


THE  DISADVANTAGE  OF  COMMON  FIELDS. 

The  disadvantages  of  cultivating  strips  in  common  fields  were  so  serious 
that  the  arable  land  was  soon  separately  inclosed.  Much  land  was  wasted  in 
the  numerous  roads  by  which  each  proprietor  gained  access  to  his  particular 
allotments.  The  lots  were  small  and  scattered  and  often  their  great  length 
in  proportion  to  their  width  prevented  cross-harrowing  or  cross-ploughing. 
The  distance  of  the  common  field  from  the  home  lots  caused  loss  of  time  in 
coming  and  going.  The  restrictions  on  the  choice  of  crops  were  undoubtedly 
annoying,  but  so  little  was  then  known  about  crop  rotations  that  it  seems 
doubtful  whether  they  imposed  a  serious  check  on  agricultural  progress. 
1  he  scattering  of  the  allotments  of  meadow  or  mowing  land  was  more  marked 
than  in  the  case  of  uplands  or  planting  land.  Earliest  land  records  of  Groton, 
Massachusetts,37  show  that  1,656  acres  of  upland  were  held  by  28  persons  in 
7/  parcels,  wrhile  5°/  acres  of  meadow  were  held  by  20  persons  in  135 
parcels.  Each  settler  held  on  the  average  59  acres  of  upland  in  2  or  3  parcels 
and  19J  acres  of  meadow  in  5  parcels. 

“  The  waste  of  time  and  insecurity  of  property  from  Indian  thefts,  when  not  within 
the  immediate  view  of  its  owners,  were  constant  sources  of  loss  and  vexation  to  the 
holders  of  these  minute  estates.  Their  exchange  and  surrender,  so  as  to  create  larger  and 
more  manageable  freeholds,  afforded  a  great  part  of  its  occupation  to  the  Town  Meetings 
of  two  generations,  and  were  a  check  to  agricultural  improvements.  The  wearisome 

hours  of  the  ‘Town’s  Quarter  Day,’  were  in  great  part  due  to  the  unskilled  plan  of 
the  first  townsmen.”  38 

The  great  economy  of  labor  secured  by  herding  cattle  in  common  was  to 
some  extent  offset  by  the  difficulty  in  controlling  breeding  and  the  dangers 
of  the  rapid  spread  of  parasites  and  diseases. 

THE  END  OF  THE  COMMONS. 

The  tendency  of  proprietary  rights  to  accumulate  in  a  few  hands  has 
already  been  noted.  As  holdings  were  thus  consolidated  the  transition  from 
common  pastures  to  separate  inclosures  was  made  relatively  easy.  The 
“  undivided  lands  ”  or  town  commons  were  rapidly  reduced  in  size  by  suc¬ 
cessive  allotments  to  the  proprietors  and  to  newcomers  whom  the  latter 
admitted  to  the  community.  By  the  end  of  the  eighteenth  century  common 
lands  had  practically  disappeared,  although  a  few  vestiges  are  even  now 
to  be  found  in  New  England  towns.39  The  ultimate  disposition  of  the 
commons  often  shows  commendable  public  spirit  on  the  part  of  the  pro¬ 
prietors.  In  Framingham,  Massachusetts  (1785),  the  proceeds  of  the  sale 
of  the  last  land  went  to  the  public  library ; 40  in  Ipswich  the  commoners 
transferred  all  their  interest  in  the  undivided  lands  to  the  town  to  help  pay 
the  debts  contracted  during  the  Revolutionary  War.41  In  Watertown,  in  1742, 
the  proprietors  devoted  the  proceeds  from  the  sale  of  the  last  lands  “to 
be  a  public  stock  for  the  use  of  said  Watertown  for  ever,  to  be  let  out  upon 

3'  In  Greene’s  Early  Land  Grants  of  Groton,  17  et  seq. 

?  j1*1"’  of  Rhode  Island,  43.  See  also  Trumbull,  Northampton ,  I,  S49 

Adams  Germanic  Origin  of  New  England  Towns  in  J.  H.  U.,  Studies  in  Hist,  and 

Pol.  Set.,  I  (1882),  No.  2,  p.  33. 

40  Barry,  Framingham ,  135. 

41  Felt,  Ipszinch,  17. 


58  AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 

interest  and  the  interest  thereof  to  be  devoted  to  help  support  the  Gospel 
Ministry  and  the  Grammar  and  English  School  in  said  Watertown  for  ever.42 

ORIGIN  OF  THE  NEW  ENGLAND  VILLAGE  COMMUNITY. 

The  similarity  of  the  home  lots  and  the  common  fields  of  the  New  England 
towns  to  the  field  system  of  the  English  manors  has  often  been  noted  and 
attempts  have  been  made  to  trace  the  origin  of  the  New  England  land  system 
to  the  institutions  of  the  ancient  Teutons  which  Tacitus  described, 
resemblances,  which  are  in  many  cases  striking,  are  certainly  not  explainable 
by  conscious  imitation  by  the  New  England  colonists  of  the  tribal  customs  of 
their  primitive  ancestors.  It  was  rather  a  case  of  the  adaptation  of  familiar 
land  practices  to  the  peculiar  conditions  which  confronted  the  English  colo¬ 
nists  in  their  new  homes.  They  wanted  compact  settlements,  partly  because 
of  the  danger  of  Indian  attacks  and  also  in  order  to  maintain  their  religious 
life  and  social  intercourse.  Hence  the  village  green  and  the  home  lots.  The 
scarcity  of  labor  made  separate  inclosures  impossible,  and  so  they  very  natur¬ 
ally  introduced  in  their  new  homes  the  common  fields  of  the  old  country. 

SIGNIFICANCE  OF  THE  NEW  ENGLAND  LAND  SYSTEM. 

The  New  England  land  system,  with  its  community  settlements,  had  im¬ 
portant  social  and  political  results,  as  has  often  been  shown  by  political  his¬ 
torians.  It  developed  habits  of  group  action  and  maintained  a  compact  social 
life.  But  on  the  economic  side  it  was  no  less  important.  It  provided  an 
effective  and  equitable  method  for  the  distribution  of  large  areas  of  land 
directly  to  the  cultivators,  in  parcels  proportioned  to  their  ability  to  use  land. 
In  Southern  New  England  and  in  New  Hampshire44  in  the  years  in  which 
the  system  of  town  grants  was  in  operation,  roughly  speaking,  before  1725, 
land  speculation  was  practically  unknown.  The  system  of  common  fields, 
as  we  have  seen,  had  obvious  defects  from  the  standpoint  of  agricultural  prog¬ 
ress  and  of  farm  management.  The  restrictions  on  the  selection  of  crops 
in  the  common  fields  and  on  the  dates  of  planting  and  harvesting,  had  they 
been  long  continued,  might  have  prevented  experiments  in  crop  rotation, 
but  as  a  matter  of  fact  they  were  soon  abandoned.  The  scattering  of  the  lots 
in  various  fields  prevented  effective  use  of  the  farmers’  time  and  equipment, 
but  this  also  was  but  temporary,  being  remedied  by  the  consolidation  of 
holdings.  On  the  other  hand,  the  advantages  of  the  system  were  permanent. 

THE  PRIVATE  LAW  OF  REAL  PROPERTY  IN  NEW  ENGLAND. 

The  rules  of  law  regarding  the  transfer  of  land  in  the  hands  of  private 
individuals  harmonized  with  the  main  principles  of  the  system  of  town 
grants.  The  transfer  of  land  by  purchase  and  sale  was  facilitated  by  very 

42  Proprietors’  Book,  186,  in  Watertown  Records,  I. 

43  See  Adams,  Germanic  Origin  of  New  England  Towns,  in  J.  H.  U.,  Studies  in  Hist. 

and  Pol.  Sci.,  I  (1882),  No.  2,  pp.  12,  16. 

44  In  Maine  the  large  grants  from  the  Crown  and  from  the  council  at  Plymouth  pro¬ 

duced  unusual  conditions.  That  province,  however,  was  very  sparsely  settled  before 

1700  and  consequently  the  treatment  of  land  tenure  there  belongs  more  properly  in 

Part  II. 


LAND  TENURE 


59 


early  laws  establishing  simple  forms  of  conveyance  and  providing  for  the 
recording  of  deeds.45  In  the  transmission  of  estates  by  inheritance  the  col¬ 
onists  soon  began  to  set  aside  the  English  custom  of  primogeniture.  Equal 
distribution  to  all  heirs,  or  the  reservation  of  only  a  double  portion  to  the 
eldest  son,  soon  became  the  general  practice  in  making  wills,  and  attempts 
were  made  to  establish  this  custom  as  the  law  of  intestate  estates.  Thus,  in 
Massachusetts  it  was  provided  in  the  Liberties  of  1641  : 46 

“  When  Parents  dye  intestate,  the  Elder  sonne  shall  have  a  doble  portion  of  his  whole 
estate  reall  and  personall,  unlesse  the  Generali  Court  upon  just  cause  alleadged  shall 
judge  otherw^c.  When  parents  dye  intestate  haveing  noe  heires  males  of  their  bodies 

, ei1^  Daughters  shall  inherit  as  Copartners,  unles  the  Generali  Court  upon  just  reason 
shall  judge  otherwise.” 


In  Connecticut  it  was  provided  in  1639 47  that  the  estates  of  intestates 
should  be  divided  among  the  heirs  by  an  administrator  under  the  supervision 
of  the  public  court  as  in  equity  they  shall  see  meet/  In  practice,  this  grant 
of  discretionary  power  resulted  in  giving  the  eldest  son  a  double  portion  of 
the  real  estate  and  younger  children,  sons  and  daughters,  single  shares  apiece, 
following  the  custom  of  those  who  made  wills.48  In  1699  the  Connecticut 
colony  incorporated  its  rules  and  customs  of  inheritance  into  a  statute  law,49 
which,  however,  was  vacated  by  the  King  in  Council  in  1727,  although  the 
similar  law  of  IMassachusetts  had  been  confirmed.  After  much  controversv 
and  delay  the  Connecticut  statute  was  finally  recognized  in  1742. 50 

In  Rhode  Island,  in  1718,  primogeniture  was  abolished,  having  been  found 
“  to  be  very  wrongful  and  injurious  to  the  public  good,”  51  but  10  years  later 
this  act  was  repealed.  Although  the  English  custom  was  thus  legally  main¬ 
tained,  land  even  in  the  Rarragansett  country,  the  region  of  large  estates 
seems  to  have  been  more  or  less  equally  apportioned  among  heirs.53 

The  reasons  for  the  modification  of  English  rules  of  inheritance  in  the 
colonies  were  largely  economic,  viz.,  the  cheapness  of  land  and  the  scarcity 
of  other  forms  of  wealth.  In  defense  of  the  Connecticut  statute  of  1699, 
Governor  Talcott 54  argued  : 


“  That  this  is  a  reasonable  custom  will  appear  if  it  be  considered  that  in  the  first  settle¬ 
ment  of  the  Country  lands  were  the  least  valuable  part  of  men’s  estates,  and  so  should  be 
much  rather  subject  to  a  division  than  his  chattels.  Land  was  plenty  and  chattels  scarce^ 
so  that  without  a  division  of  the  lands  as  well  as  chattels,  very  little  could  be  assigned  to 
any  except  the  eldest  son.  And  the  land  itself  must  have  remained  unoccupy’d,  if  it  had 
not  been  divided.  It  was  esteem’d  much  in  favour  of  creditors  when  they  'were  not 
obliged  to  take  lands  in  satisfaction  of  their  debts,  ....  and  it  remains  so  to  this  time. 
It  was  inhabitants  and  not  land  that  was  wanting ;  yea,  it  was  common  in  dividing  lands 


45  New  Haven  Colony  Records  (1654),  P-  215;  Rhode  Island  Records,  I,  54  (1638)  • 
Connecticut  Colony  Public  Records,  I,  552  (1650). 

40  Mass.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  3d  series,  VIII,  230.  See  also  Massachusetts  (Province) 
Acts  and  Resolves,  I  (1602),  ch.  14,  p.  44. 

47  Public  Records,  I,  38. 

48  Conn.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  IV,  175,  187,  180. 

49  Public  Records,  IV,  307. 

50  Ibid.,  VII,  191,  note. 

51  Rhode  Island  Records,  IV,  238. 

52  Ibid.,  417. 

53  Charming’  in  J.  H.  U.  Studies  in  History  and  Political  Science,  IV  (1886),  No.  3,  p.  16. 
instructions  to  Jonathan  Belcher  (the  agent  of  the  colony  in  England),  in  Conn. 

Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  IV,  144. 


60  AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 

among  the  inhabitants  to  oblige  them  to  hold  the  land  they  had  once  accepted,  that  they 
might  bear  the  burthen  of  Taxes  and  fencing.  And  much  of  our  lands  remain  yet 
unsubdued,  and  must  continue  so  without  the  assistance  of  the  younger  sons,  which 
in  reason  can’t  be  expected  if  they  have  no  part  of  the  inheritance,  for  in  this  poor 
country,  if  the  landlord  lives,  the  tenant  starves;  few  estates  here  will  let  for  little  more 
than  for  maintaining  fences  and  paying  taxes.  By  this  custom  of  dividing  inheritances, 
all  were  supply’d  with  land  to  work  upon,  the  land  as  well  occupy’d  as  the  number  of 
hands  would  admit  of,  the  people  universally  imploy’d  in  husbandry 

LAND  TENURE  IN  THE  MIDDLE  COLONIES. 

The  characteristic  features  of  the  New  England  system,  community  set¬ 
tlement  and  freehold  tenure  in  small  parcels,  were  present  in  the  Middle 
Colonies,  but  not  so  uniformly  predominant.  Leaving  New  York  aside  for 
the  moment,  where  institutions  of  the  Dutch  introduced  a  peculiar  factor, 
let  us  consider  the  conditions  of  land  tenure  in  the  Provinces  of  East  and 
West  Jersey  and  Pennsylvania.  These  were  proprietary  colonies;  in  them 
the  land  as  well  as  the  privileges  of  government  were  granted  by  the  King, 
not  to  trading  corporations  as  in  New  England,  but  to  individuals  who  were 
called  proprietors.  A  proprietary  grant,  such  as  William  Penn  had  from 
Charles  II,  was  regarded  as  a  private  estate.  It  could  be  transmitted  by 
inheritance  to  heirs ;  it  could  be  sold,  leased,  or  mortgaged.  So  the  proprie¬ 
tors  became  not  only  political  governors,  they  were  investors  and  often 
speculators  in  land. 

TERMS  OF  DISTRIBUTION  OF  LAND  IN  PENNSYLVANIA  AND 

NEW  JERSEY. 

The  enormous  tracts  of  land,  such  as  Penn  and  the  New  Jersey  proprietors 
held,  were  of  no  use  unless  they  could  be  peopled.  Consequently  the  pro 
prietors  advertised  for  settlers,  putting  out  statements  of  the  attractions 
of  the  country,  accompanied  by  the  terms  on  which  land  would  be  distributed 
to  newcomers.  In  New  Jersey,  the  Concessions  and  Agreements  of  the  Lords 
Proprietors,  of  1664, 55  provided  that  every  freeman  who  should  transport 
himself  before  January  1665  and  provide  himself  with  a  musket,  ammuni¬ 
tion,  and  six  months’  provisions,  should  receive  150  acres  of  land,  and  for 
every  able-bodied  man  servant  similarly  equipped  who  should  be  transported 
with  him  the  master  was  to  receive  another  150  acres.  Servants  were  prom¬ 
ised  75  acres  of  land  at  the  expiration  of  their  term  of  service.  A  premium 
was  put  on  early  migration  by  the  allotment  of  lesser  amounts  of  land  to 
those  settlers  who  arrived  in  the  following  years.  Actual  settlement  was 
required  as  a  condition  of  all  grants,  it  being  provided  that  one  able-bodied 
servant,  or  two  weaker  ones,  should  be  maintained  upon  every  100  acres. 
The  land  was  to  be  held  in  free  and  common  socage,  but  subject  to  the  pay¬ 
ment  of  a  yearly  quitrent  of  one-half  penny  per  acre  to  the  lords  piopiietors, 
beginning  after  March  1670. 

In  West  New  Jersey  a  similar  agreement  was  drawn  up  in  1677  56  giving 
70  acres  to  the  earliest  arrivals  and  for  their  able-bodied  servants,  and  less 


55  Reprinted  in  Smith’s  History  of  the  Colony  of  New  Jersey,  512  et  seq. 

56  Concessions  and  Agreements ,  in  New  Jersey  Archives,  I,  244. 


LAND  TENURE 


61 


amounts  for  those  who  came  later.  Quitrents  were  to  be  paid,  and  actual 
settlement,  or  at  least  the  residence  of  servants  on  the  land  for  a  term  of 
years,  was  a  condition  of  every  grant. 

William  Penn,  the  proprietor  of  Pennsylvania,  introduced  the  unique 
practice  of  selling  land  to  prospective  settlers.  In  1681,  before  leaving  Eng¬ 
land,  he  sold  over  300,000  acres  in  amounts  of  from  250  to  10,000  acres  to 
250  persons,  mostly  well-to-do  Quakers  of  Southern  England.57  His  plan 
of  land  distribution  he  outlined  as  follows : 58  1 

Those 'tEu’takp’iin  f "  .relate  three  ,sorts  of  People:  1st.  Those  that  will  buy:  2dly. 
be  certain  as  m  numhl  fT  ‘i  3  Servants-  T°  the  first,  the  Shares  I  sell  shall 
Lres  free  from  ^b  T°a-  Cr-eS;  ^  15  to  say’  every  one  shaU  contain  Five  thousand 
Quit  rent  hut  Z  F  'ncumbrfnce,  the  price  a  hundred  pounds,  and  for  the 

the  said o! ?1W  E  fi,SK  Sh'ln?1  °r  thJe  .value  of  h  year,y  for  a  hundred  Acres;  and 
unon  Rent  the  h  u t t0  t0  be  paid  1,11  If®4.  To  the  second  sort,  that  take  up  Land 

inft  Two  hundred  Arres^T fPi?  *,°  d°’  paying  yearIy  °ne  peny  per  Acre’  not  «ceed- 
wTtl  L  n  A  a  !'  T°  ™  th'rd  SOrt>  t0  Wlt’  Servants  that  are  carried  over,  Fifty 

whetT theh'tim  *is°«cpired!’  6  eWy  Head’  a"d  Fifty  Act«  -er y  Servant 

T™-  °f  1,000  f -reS  °r  m°re  were  not  to  have  over  I- 000  acres  in  a 
single  tract,  unless  within  3  years  they  settled  a  family  on  each  thousand 

acres.  Every  grant  must  be  settled  within  3  years  on  pain  of  forfeiture  59 


THE  SIZE  OF  GRANTS. 

As  Penn  and  the  other  heads  of  proprietary  governments  were  careful  to 
reserve  the  right  to  dispose  of  their  lands  on  more  liberal  terms  if  they 
wished,  there  was  little  uniformity  in  the  size  of  grants.  On  the  whole  they 
seem  to  have  been  somewhat  larger  than  in  New  England.  In  the  towns  in 
northeast  New  Jersey  which  were  settled  from  New  England,  the  normal 
size  of  grants  was  between  100  and  200  acres,  with  only  occasionally  a  grant 
as  large  as  300  acres.  In  the  Monmouth  Grant  the  allotments  were  somewhat 
larger.  Outside  the  towns,  there  were  extensive  transfers  of  land,  and  a  few 
large  estates  were  founded  which  were  cultivated  with  negro  slaves.  But  in 
general  in  the  early  years  the  “  soil  of  East  Jersey  was  being  taken  up  in 
comparatively  small  allotments  by  bona-fide  settlers.  Anything  like  a  system 
of  large  estates  was  unknown,  nor  was  land  speculation  being  carried  on  to 
any  great  extent,  except  of  course  by  the  lords  proprietors  themselves  ” 60 
After  the  purchase  of  the  Province  of  East  Jersey  by  the  24  proprietors, 
the  taking  up  of  land  on  a  large  scale  began.  In  the  Elizabethtown  tract 
38  surveys  (1683-1703)  were  for  500  acres  or  more,  and  of  these,  23  were 
over  1,000  acres  and  8  over  2,000  acres.  Not  only  in  this  section,  but  throu^h- 
out.  the  whole  province,  a  period  of  comparatively  large  surveys  began” in 
1683,  the  holders  sometimes  being  proprietors  themselves,  sometimes  outside 
investors.  Provision  was  made  for  the  subdivision  of  the  large  grants  for 


57  Myers’s  Narratives,  219. 

^  Some  Account  of  Pennsylvania,  in  Myers’s  Narratives,  208 

°  516  et°seqa^  C°ncessions  of  11  Jul ^  168 T'  Reprinted  in  Hazard’s  Annals  of  Penn., 

WTa"5  J'ff  pr?pncre  °f  Jersey  Columbia  University  Studies  in  History,  Eco- 
mic  and  Public  Law,  XXX,  44.  Lnless  otherwise  indicated  facts  regarding  New 
Jersey  have  been  drawn  from  this  monograph.  8 


62 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


not  many  of  the  original  proprietors  intended  to  retain  their  holdings  intact 

«<  bona-fide  ,«!«,.  were  »»,ew„a, 
larger  than  in  the  eastern  province.  The  earliest  adventurers,  indeed,  received 
only  70  acres  for  each  servant  transported.  But  each  of  the  I0»Pr»Prie® 
was  entitled  to  an  original  allotment  of  5,200  acres  plus  a  second  distntato 
of  5  000  acres.  Among  the  earlier  settlers  a  large  share  held  proprietary 
rights ;  later  arrivals  bought  fractions  of  proprietary  rights  or  merely  pur¬ 
chased  land  from  a  proprietor.  Few  grants  were  for  less  than  100  acre  , 
while  those  of  200,  300,  and  even  500  acres  were  not  rare. 

A  large  part  of  the  interior  lands  of  New  Jersey  were  held  by  the  West 
Jersey  Society,  a  business  company  organized  in  1691  to  make  profit  from 
land  sales.  It  held  at  one  time  one-fifth  of  the  area  of  West Jersey,  1 
ino-  the  Minnisinck  Province  of  200,500  acres,  lying  between  the  Delaware 
River  and  the  Blue  Mountains,  and  all  of  Cape  May  County.  T  e  company 
sold  land  in  general  in  larger  tracts  than  those  of  the  earlier  settlers. 

QUITRENTS. 

The  annual  payment  by  the  grantee  of  land  of  a  sum  prescribed  by  the 
proprietor,  in  lieu  of  all  services,  was  a  uniform  feature  of  the  land  system 
of  ah  proprietary  colonies.  As  a  form  of  revenue,  qu.trents  proved  uniform  y 
unsatisfactory.  The  payments  were  evaded  whenever  possible  a"  'v 
always  tardy.  In  Pennsylvania,  quitrents  were  a  perpetual  s  _ 
dissatisfaction,”  and  in  New  Jersey,  as  well  as  in  New  York,  ywlent  resistance 
was  sometimes  offered  to  the  claim  of  the  landlord.  In  West  Jersey  the 
proprietors  did  not  attempt  to  collect  quitrents,  but  in  the  eastern  province 
the  disputes  between  the  proprietors  and  the  settlers  on  the  Ehzabet 
and  Monmouth  tracts,  beginning  before  1700,  led  m  the  eighteenth  cen  ry 
to  long  periods  of  agrarian  discontent  and  disorder.02 

LAND  TENURE  IN  NEW  NETHERLAND  AND  NEW  YORK. 

The  patroonships  of  New  Netherland  were  so  unique  a  feature  of  early 
land  tenure  that  they  have  received  more  attention  than  their  influence  on 
agricultural  conditions  would  seem  to  justify.  According  to  the  Privileges 
and  Exemptions  of  1629, 63  anyone  who  should  within  4  years  plant  a  co  ony 
of  co  souls  over  15  years  old  might  be  acknowledged  a  patroon  of^  ew 
Netherland.  Each  patroon  was  permitted  to  take  up  a  tract  of  land  fou 
leagues  T 16  English  miles]  along  the  shore,  or  one  side  of  a  navigable  river, 
or  °two  leagues  on  each  side  of  a  river,  and  so  far  into  the  country  as  the 

situation  of  the  occupiers  shall  permit . ”  These  grants  unlimited  in 

extent,  could  be  taken  up  anywhere  in  the  colony  except  on  the  is  and  of 
Manhattan,  which  the  Dutch  West  India  Company  reserved  for  Use  If.  The 
patroons  had  the  right  of  perpetual  inheritance  and  disposal  by  will.  The 
colonists  were  to  be  freed  from  taxation  for  10  years.  The  patroons  were 

61  Eggleston,  Social  Conditions  in  the  Colonies.  Century  Magazine,  XXVIII  (1884), 

62  Osgood,  American  Colonies  in  the  Eighteenth  Century,  11,39-  translation 

os  Reprinted  in  English  in  Jameson’s  Narratives.  go-p6;  and  m  less  correct  transla 

in  O’Callaghan’s  N.  Y.  Documents  Relative  to  Colonial  History ,  II,  553  55/- 


LAND  TENURE 


63 


more  than  landlords ;  they  were  political  officers  with  many  of  the  powers  of 
the  lords  of  feudal  manors,  such  as  court  jurisdiction,  milling  rights  etc 
1  heir  colonists  were  bound  to  stay  on  the  estate  for  a  term  of  years.  '  ’ 

"der  such  provisions  some  very  large  properties  and  a"  few  smaller 
patroonships  were  established ;  Rensselaerswyck  and  Pavonia  on  the  Hudson 
iver,  and  Svaanendael  on  the  Delaware.  Of  these  only  the  first  a  tract  of 
upwards  ot  700,000  acres,  became  at  all  permanent.  The  others  were  either 

sSft,MhoId-hmrhShtS  Were  t>UrChaSed  by  the  company.<“  But  meanwhile 
nenci  o  f  H  d  ^  inCreas!5  raPldly  and>  notwithstanding  the  promi- 

V  cl  ?f  a  r  ^a?,0rS'  W6re  the  dominant  form  of  land  tenure  in  New 
-  e  terland,  for  the  Dutch  West  India  Company  had  not  overlooked  the  inter- 

es  s  of  small  settlers.  The  Privileges  and  Exemptions  of  l629  «  contained  the 
tollowmg  provision :  y 

nf'  tt!-regar<!  *°  lUCh  -pri7ate  pers0ns  as  on  their  own  account,  or  others  in  the  service 

«hithe  a™daSseettle  X:n  hu  ‘han  ““  of  Pa‘™->  shal>  be  inclined  to  go 

r  ,  they  shalI>  Wlth  the  approbation  of  the  Director  and  Council  there 

toe  improvfand  asheaU  Pe„Tov  T  ^7  S*  “  ^  ^  35  they  ^all  be  able  roperly 

prove,  and  shall  enjoy  the  same  m  full  property  either  for  themselves  or  masters.” 

New  SherlTT  ’-!i!ral  Chfrter  ^  grMted  t0  any°ne  who  should  emigrate  to 
1  etherland  with  5  souls,  100  morgens  (about  200  acres)  of  land  Under 

end  oTlohI’TsH5 7  Tf  7“  "P  in  large  nUmbers  on  the  western 

d  of  Long  Island,  on  Staten  Island,  and  on  the  west  bank  of  the  Hudson 

„  °US1,  made  •?,ngmalIy  by  mdividuals,  the  Dutch  settlements  were  soon 

of  New  Engfand!"age  C°mmunities  which  resembled  in  many  respects  those 


LAND  TENURE  UNDER  THE  ENGLISH  GOVERNORS. 

The  English  governors  did  not  introduce  any  radical  departures  in  the 
Dutch  land  system.  They  confirmed  all  Dutch  titles,  both  those  of  the  small 

of  York  nf  ° V  6  P^T’  substituting,  of  course,  the  tenure  of  the  Duke 
of.,  ork  (later  James  II)  for  that  of  the  Dutch  West  India  Company.  Their 
pohcy  m  new  grants  a.med  to  secure  rapid  settlement  and  cultivation,  “  that 
thereby  the  respective  plantations  might  be  the  better  peopled,  strengthened, 
and  improved,  and  his  Majesty’s  revenue  accordingly  advanced  ”  as 

Governor  N.colls 69  reported  (ca.  1669)  that  “  the  severall  proportions  of 
indents  of  Land  are  alwaies  allowed  with  respect  to  the  numbers  of  Planters 

taking*67  are  a”e  t0  manage’  and  in  what  time  t0  accomplish  their  under- 

For  the  first  20  years  of  the  English  occupation  the  grants  of  land  were 
tor  the  most  part,  under  1,000  acres  and  seldom  exceeded  2,000  acres.70  The 
wide  discretion  given  to  the  English  governors  led  to  abuses  in  the  granting 

64  Osgood,  American  Colonies ,  II,  31.  ~ 

6j  Jameson’s  Narratives,  94 

M  ReIP8ine‘tede’n  English  transIation  in  N-  y-  Documents  Relative  to  Colonial  History,  I, 

C7  See  Eltinge,  Dutch  Village  Communities  on  the  Hudson  Rivpr  in  t  jt  tt  o . 

cs  XmyHTry  and,  PSU!iCal  Sc7“’  IV'  No.  I  (1886  “pp.”  ’  m  1  H-  U-  StUdUS 

69  t  *  -Documents  Relative  to  Colonial  History,  IV,  392 

70  v  v  Cnlaghan’  Do^mentary  History  of  New  York,  T,  87. 

Y •»  Documents  Relative  to  Colonial  History,  IV,  392. 


64  AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 

of  land  in  the  later  seventeenth  century.  Governor  Dongan’s  commission  " 

( 1 6861  empowered  him  to  grant  lands  to  any  planters  or  mhabitan  s 
s(uch  ter  Zlunir  such  moderate  Quit-rents,  services .and  a^dge- 
ments  as  he  should  think  fit.  Similar  powers  were  granted  to  latei  govern 
until  reports  began  to  come  back  to  England  of  extravagant  grants  to  favored 
individuals.  The  Earl  of  Bellomont  reported  "  (169S)  that  his  Pred^s  ’ 
Colonel  Fletcher,  “  hath  made  it  almost  impossible  to  settle  the  Count  y 
with  Inhabitants  there  being  no  land  but  what  must  be  purchased  from  h 
7ew  Grantees  .  ”  Instances  were  cited  of  6  enormous  grants  varying 

Rl  s”o  miles  each.  In  .notes  le.Ses”  he  es.nna.ed  that  »  te. 

whole  Province  is  given  away  to  about  thirty  persons  in  e  ec  ’  ‘  '  ’  .  f 
The  effect  of  such  a  policy  was  to  give  a  new  impetus  to  the  system 
large  estates  which  the  Dutch  had  attempted  to  establish,  but  in  spite  o 
the  organization  of  a  few  manors  such  as  those  at  Fordham  and  Pelham, 
the  typical  land  tenure  remained  that  of  the  small  freeholder  cultivating  his 
own  m7d  Where  cheap  land  was  so  abundant  and  farming  could  be  earned 
°7  w ith  so  little  capital  it  would  indeed  have  been  an  unenterprising  dolt 
who  would  have  preferred  the  life  of  a  tenant  to  that  of  a  freeholder  The 
Earl  of  Bellomont  remarked  "  that  “  men  will  not  care  to  become  base  tenants 
to  proprietors  of  land  in  this  province  [1.  e.,  New  York],  when  they  c 
buy* the  fee-simple  of  lands  in  the  Jerseys  for  five  pounds  per  hundred  acres, 

and  I  beleive  [sic]  as  cheaply  in  Pensylvama.” 

QUITRENTS  IN  NEW  YORK. 

In  New  York  the  requirement  of  quitrents  as  a  condition  of  land  grants 
had  been  enjoined  upon  the  governors,  and  in  1687  a  minimum  annua 
payment  was  specified  of  2s.  6d.  for  each  100  acres  of  land  granted  but 
this  rule  was  disregarded.  Governor  Dongan  reported  (1687)  that  the 
quitrents  were  very  inconsiderable,  “  the  most  part  of  the  paten  s  gran!;e__ 
by  my  predecessors  were  without  any  reservation  of  Quit-Kents.  .... 
Occasionally  we  find  instances  of  quitrents  paid  in  kind.  The  planters  on 
Staten  Island  paid  1  bushel  of  wheat  for  each  80  acres,  and  on  the  arge 
grants  in  the  Mohawk  Valley  quitrents  were  paid  in  otter  or  bearer  skins. 

THE  METHODS  OF  SETTLEMENT  IN  THE  MIDDLE  COLONIES. 

The  typical  form  of  settlement  in  New  England  was  by  communities,  and 
by  the  migration  of  New  Englanders  to  Long  Island,  to  Westchester  County, 
New  York,  and  to  northern  New  Jersey  their  typical  institutions  were  in  re¬ 
duced  into  the  colonies  under  proprietary  government  Denton  ■ '  observed 
the  New  England  system  in  operation  in  New  York  (1670).  He  wrote. 

“  To  give  some  satisfaction  to  people  that  shall  be  desirous  to  transport  themseLes 
thither,  ( the  Countrey  being  capable  of  entertaining  many  thousands,)  how  and  after 

71  N.  Y.  Documents  Relative  to  Colonial  Histoiy,  III,  3^i» 

73  N.  Y.,  Documents  Relative  to  Colonial  History ,  IV,  39 7- 

75  O’Callaghan,  Documentary  History  of  N ew  York,  I,  164. 

76  N.  Y.  Documents  Relative  to  Colonial  History,  HI,  3^3  >  I*>  39-* 

77  Brief  Description  of  Nezv  York,  17. 


LAND  TENURE 


65 


what  manner  people  live,  and  how  Land  may  be  procured,  &c,  I  shall  answer,  that  the 
usual  way,  is  for  a  Company  of  people  to  joyn  together,  either  enough  to  make  a  Town, 
or  a  lesser  number,  these  go  with  the  consent  of  the  Governor,  and  view  a  Tract  of 
Land,  there  being  choice  enough,  and  finding  a  place  convenient  for  a  Town,  they  return 
to  the  Governor,  who  upon  their  desire  admits  them  into  the  Colony,  and  gives  them  a 
Grant  or  Patent  for  the  said  Land,  for  themselves  and  Associates.  These  persons  being 
thus  qualified,  settle  the  place,  and  take  in  what  inhabitants  to  themselves  they  shall  see 
cause  to  admit  of,  till  their  Town  be  full;  these  Associates  thus  taken  in  have  equal 
privileges  with  themselves,  and  they  make  a  division  of  the  Land  suitable  to  every 
mans  occasions,  no  man  being  debarr’d  of  such  quantities  as  he  hath  occasion  for,  the 
rest  they  let  lie  in  common  till  they  have  occasion  for  a  new  division,  never  dividing 
their  Pasture- land  at  all,  which  lies  in  common  to  the  whole  Town.” 

But  the  proprietary  system  favored  an  individualistic  system  of  settlement. 
Grants  were  made  to  individuals  rather  than  to  groups  of  settlers.  In  New 
England  the  village  institutions  which  provided  for  the  distribution  of  land 
and  the  location  of  farms  within  the  town  grant  were  framed  in  advance 
of  settlement.  In  the  Middle  Colonies  the  process  was  reversed.  Settlers 
received  their  grants  as  individuals,  often  after  actual  settling  upon  the  land, 
and  when  a  number  of  farms  had  been  cleared  in  a  neighborhood  a  local 
government  was  organized.  Says  Osgood : 78 

The  economic  impulse  under  which  the  provinces  were  settled  operated  upon  indi¬ 
viduals  and  families  more  than  upon  groups  and  entire  communities.  Migration  and 

the  progress  of  settlement  within  the  provinces  were,  in  most  cases,  distinctly  indi¬ 
vidualistic  in  character.” 

The  evils  of  dispersion  of  population  were  so  obvious  that  the  proprietors 
undertook  to  encourage  group  settlements.  Governor  Nicolls  of  New  York 
reported  (ca.  1669)  : 79 

“  The  Governour  gives  liberty  to  Planters  to  find  out  and  buy  lands  from  the  Indians 
where  it  pleaseth  best  the  Planters  but  the  seating  of  Towns  together  is  necessary  in 
these  parts  of  America,  especially  upon  the  Maine  Land.” 

In  East  New  Jersey  the  proprietors  seem  to  have  originally  contemplated 
group  settlements.  In  the  “  Proposals  ”  80  of  1682  we  find  the  following 
provisions : 

‘And  forasmuch  as  it  will  be  most  commodious  for  planters  to  live  together, 
whereby  they  may  be  a  meet  help  to  each  other :  It  is  ordered,  that  all  the  purchasers 
and  takers  up  of  land,  shall  sit  down  by  some  village  or  township  already  laid  out,  or 
to  be  laid  out  hereafter,  in  the  said  province.” 

Penn  understood  thoroughly  the  social  advantages  of  community  settle¬ 
ments.  In  the  Conditions  and  Concessions  of  1681  81  he  made  specific  pro¬ 
visions  for  the  colonists  who  wished  to  “  sit  together  in  a  lot  or  township.” 
Later  he  laid  out  a  number  of  townships  of  5,000  acres  in  squares,  each  hav¬ 
ing  a  village  with  a  minimum  of  10  families.  The  arrangement  of  the  villages 
he  describes  as  follows : 82 

“Our  Townships  lie  square;  generally  the  Village  in  the  Center;  the  Houses  either 
opposit,  or  else  opposit  to  the  middle,  betwixt  two  houses  over  the  way,  for  near  neighbor- 
hood.  We  have  another  Method,  that  tho  the  Village  be  in  the  Center,  yet  after  a 

78  American  Colonies,  II,  48. 

70  New  York  Documents  Relative  to  Colonial  History,  III,  188. 

80  In  Smith’s  New  Jersey,  545. 

81  Hazard,  Annals  of  Penn.,  516. 

8-  Jurther  Account  of  Pennsylvania,  in  Myers’s  Narratives,  263. 

6 


66 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


different  manner :  Five  hundred  Acres  are  allotted  for  the  Village,  which  among  ten 
families,  comes  to  fifty  Acres  each:  This  lies  square,  and  on  the  outside  of  the  square 
stand  the  Houses,  with  their  fifty  Acres  running  back,  where  ends  meeting  make  the 
Center  of  the  500  Acres  as  they  are  to  the  whole.  Before  the  Doors  of  the  Houses  lies 
the  highway,  and  cross  it,  every  man’s  450  Acres  of  Land  that  makes  up  his  Complement 
of  500,  so  that  the  Conveniency  of  Neighbourhood  is  made  agreeable  with  that  of  the 

Land.” 

Many  of  the  colonists  objected  and  wanted  to  have  all  their  land  in  a  lump,83 

“  tho  by  such  Wilderness  vacancies  they  had  ruin’d  the  Country,  ....  I  had  m  my 
view  Society,  Assistance,  Busy  Commerce,  Instruction  of  Youth,  Government  of  Peoples 
manners,  Conveniency  of  Religious  Assembling,  Encouragement  of  Mechanics  distinct 
and  beaten  Roads,  and  it  has  answered  in  all  those  respects,  I  think,  to  an  Universal 

Content.” 

Notwithstanding  the  encouragement  and  planning  of  Penn  and  other 
proprietors,  settlement  by  communities  never  attained  in  the  Middle  Colonies 
the  importance  which  it  held  in  New  England. 


LAW  OF  INHERITANCE. 

The  law  and  custom  of  the  transfer  of  land  by  inheritance  was  more  favor¬ 
able  to  the  growth  of  large  estates  in  some  of  the  Middle  Colonies  than  in 
New  England.  In  New  York  the  English  custom  of  primogeniture  was 
formally  established  in  1683,  when  the  First  Colonial  Assembly  resolved: 

“That  from  hence  forward  Noe  Lands  Within  this  province  shall  be  Esteemed  or 
accounted  a  Chattle  or  personall  Estate  but  an  Estate  of  ^Inheritance  according  to  the 
Custome  and  practice  of  his  Majesties  Realme  of  England.” 

In  New  Jersey  equal  distribution  among  children  of  intestates  was  the 
rule,85  and  also  in  Pennsylvania  until  I7°5>  when  a  provincial  law  provided 
that  the  eldest  son  should  have  a  double  share  of  the  estate  of  an  intestate. 


SUMMARY. 

The  land  system  of  the  Middle  Colonies  had  a  legal  and  institutional  basis 
different  from  that  of  New  England.  The  former  was  based  on  the  town 
grant  the  latter  on  the  proprietary  grant.  In  New  England  land  was  settled 
by  communities,  in  the  Middle  Colonies  by  individuals.  The  payment  of 
quitrents  was  a  uniform  condition  of  all  grants  in  the  Middle  Colonies,  but 
such  payments  were  practically  unknown  in  New  England.  The  law  and 
custom  of  inheritance  was  more  favorable  to  the  growth  of  large  estates  in 
the  Middle  Colonies,  particularly  in  New  York.  Nevertheless,  the  mam 
features  of  land  tenure  were  the  same.  Land  was  cultivated  by  the  owners, 
in  small  parcels  in  Pennsylvania  as  in  Massachusetts,  in  New  York  as  in 
Connecticut.  The  differences  in  the  laws  of  land  tenure  and  the  regulations 
for  land  distribution  were  not  essential.  Behind  them,  in  both  New  England 
and  the  Middle  Colonies,  was  a  common  and  fundamental  economic  condition, 
the  abundance  of  cheap  land.  Cheap  land  made  large  estates  and  tenancy 
as  impossible  in  one  section  as  in  the  other. 

83  Myers’s  Narratives,  263. 

84  New  York  Colonial  Laws,  I,  114* 

85  Learning  and  Spicer,  Concessions  and  Agreements,  403,  430. 

86  Laws  of  the  Province  of  Penn.  (1728),  49. 


Part  II 

RURAL  ECONOMY  IN  THE  EIGHTEENTH 

CENTURY 


' 


Chapter  VI. — Pioneering  in  the  Eighteenth 

Century. 

In  studying  the  agricultural  development  of  New  England  and  the  Middle 
Colonies  in  the  eighteenth  century,  we  can  distinguish  two  sharply  con¬ 
trasted  types  of  farming  and  of  rural  life:  (a)  pioneering,  the  agriculture 
of  the  new  settlements  on  the  frontier,  and  (b)  the  agriculture  of  the  older 
communities  along  the  seacoast  and  in  the  river  valleys. 

Until  recent  years  pioneering  has  been  an  important  feature  of  our  agricul¬ 
tural  history  at  all  stages  of  its  development.  The  frontier  with  its  appar¬ 
ently  inexhaustible  supply  of  new,  cheap  land  and  its  democratic  and  unre¬ 
strained  social  life  has  always  been  present  to  the  westward  of  the  older 
settlements,  drawing  away  from  them  their  surplus  population,  the  most 
energetic  as  well  as  the  most  unruly  of  the  younger  generation.  If  the 
frontier  has  been  a  safety-valve  for  the  relief  of  political  discontent,  it  has 
also  proved,  changing  the  metaphor,  a  sponge  absorbing  much  of  the  best 
talent  from  the  farms  of  the  East. 

THE  WESTWARD  PROGRESS  OF  SETTLEMENT. 

The  first  American  frontier,  as  Professor  Turner  1  has  shown,  was  on  the 
Atlantic  coast.  Until  the  end  of  the  seventeenth  century  the  colonists  had 
occupied  only  a  narrow  fringe  of  the  Coastal  Plain  from  the  Penobscot 
River  to  New  York  City  and  in  addition  the  lower  valleys  of  the  Connecticut, 
Hudson,  and  Delaware  Rivers.2  In  the  hundred  years  ending  in  1763  the 
colonists,  amid  almost  incessant  Indian  warfare,  had  succeeded  in  clearing 
and  settling  a  strip  of  Coastal  Plain  about  100  miles  wide.  This  area,  inter¬ 
mediate  between  the  coast  settlements  of  the  seventeenth  century  and  the 
trans-Allegheny  settlements  of  the  late  eighteenth  century,  Professor  Turner 
had  aptly  termed  “  The  Old  West.”  In  New  England  the  frontier  was  found 
in  the  first  half  of  the  eighteenth  century  in  the  western  counties  of  Massa¬ 
chusetts  and  Connecticut.  In  New  York  the  population  expanded  along  the 
Hudson  and  Mohawk  Valleys  into  the  valleys  of  their  tributaries,  the  Wall- 
kill  and  Cherry  Valleys,  and  also  along  the  sources  of  the  Susquehanna.  In 
Pennsylvania  the  trend  of  settlement  was  into  the  Great  Valley,  the  fertile 
limestone  region  of  the  southeastern  part  of  the  State  and  then  southward 
along  this  valley  into  the  southern  uplands. 

After  the  Treaty  of  Paris  (1763)  had  removed  the  French  and  Indian 
menace,  a  great  swarming  of  pioneers  into  new  land  took  place.  From  the 
old  towns  of  Southern  New  England  thousands  of  settlers  moved  into  New 
Hampshire,  Maine,  and  Vermont.  After  the  Revolution,  immigration  con- 

1  The  Old  West,  in  Wisconsin  Hist.  Soc.  Proceedings,  1908,  pp.  184-233. 

2  Maps  showing  settlement  in  1660  are  to  be  found  in  Channing,  United  States,  I,  510, 

and  in  Shepherd,  Historical  Atlas,  189,  191. 


69 


70 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


tinued  into  northern  New  England,  until  by  1812  practically  all  its  lands 
available  for  farming  had  been  taken  up.  Into  New  York  State,  meanwhile, 
a  stream  of  New  England  settlers  had  been  flowing  via  the  Mohawk  Valley 
to  take  up  lands  in  the  fertile  Genessee  Country.  From  the  older  settlements 
of  Pennsylvania  emigrants  passed  across  the  Alleghenies  and  into  the  fertile 
valleys  of  the  Ohio.  It  is  unnecessary  to  repeat  here  the  story  of  the  westward 
movement  of  our  population.  We  are  interested  only  in  the  kind  of  agricul¬ 
ture  which  was  carried  on  by  the  pioneers  of  the  eighteenth  century,  and 
inasmuch  as  the  record  of  the  expansion  of  agriculture  into  the  Ohio  and 
Mississippi  Valleys  belongs  chiefly  to  the  nineteenth  century,  we  shall  confine 
our  discussion  to  conditions  east  of  the  Alleghenies.3 

THE  CAUSES  OF  EXPANSION  ON  NEW  LAND. 

The  forces  which  caused  the  movement  of  the  agricultural  population  west¬ 
ward  to  the  Alleghenies  were  varied.  The  soil  of  the  old  settlements  soon 
showed  the  effects  of  an  exhausting  cropping  system  without  adequate  fer¬ 
tilization.  Jared  Eliot 4  wrote  in  1747  from  Killingworth,  Connecticut,  on 
Long  Island  Sound,  that  soil  depletion  was  in  his  opinion  the  most  important 
cause  of  the  failure  of  the  wheat  crops  ;  continuing : 

“When  our  fore-fathers  settled  here,  they  entered  a  Land  which  probably  never  had 
been  Ploughed  since  the  Creation;  the  Land  being  new  they  depended  upon  the  natural 
Fertility  of  the  Ground,  which  served  their  purpose  very  well,  and  when  they  had  worn 
out  one  piece  they  cleared  another,  without  any  concern  to  amend  their  Land,  except  a 
little  helped  by  the  Fold  and  Cart-dung,  ....  Our  Lands  being  thus  worn  out,  I  sup¬ 
pose  to  be  one  Reason  why  so  many  are  inclined  to  Remove  to  new  Places  that  they  may 
raise  Wheat :  As  also  that  they  may  have  more  Room,  thinking  that  we  live  too  thick.” 

As  early  as  1750  the  declining  yield  of  grain  crops  showed  that  the  land 
in  the  neighborhood  of  Philadelphia  was  being  “  worn  out  ” ; 5  and  in  the 
neighborhood  of  both  New  York  and  Boston  it  was  evident  before  the  end 
of  the  eighteenth  century  that  fertility  was  decreasing.6 

THE  RISE  OF  LAND  VALUES  IN  THE  OLDER  COMMUNITIES. 

Land  values  in  the  eighteenth  century  reflected  the  increasing  scarcity  of 
good  land  in  the  older  communities  as  contrasted  with  its  abundance  on  the 
frontier.  Price  data  of  the  eighteenth  century  are  fragmentary  7  and  unsat¬ 
isfactory  because  of  the  disordered  state  of  the  colonial  currencies.  In  the 
case  of  land  values  comparisons  are  rendered  especially  difficult  by  the  lack 


3  For  a  full  discussion  of  the  movements  of  population  in  the  eighteenth  century  see 

Turner,  The  Old  West,  in  Wis.  Hist.  Soc.  Proceedings  (1908),  pp.  184-233.  Also 
Mathews,  The  Expansion  of  New  England,  chapters  I  to  V. 

4  Field  Husbandry,  23,  24. 

5  Watson,  Philadelphia  (1830  ed.),  717. 

GNew  York  Society  for  Promotion  of  Useful  Arts,  Transactions,  I  (2d  ed.,  1801),  57; 
American  Academy,  Memoirs,  I,  385. 

7  Fragmentary  data  are  to  be  found  in  the  writings  of  the  travelers  of  the  period.  See 
especially  Cooper,  Information  Respecting  America  (1794),  pp.  71,  94,  107,  108; 
Richard  Smith,  Journal  (1769),  pp.  21,  32.  See  also  Brown,  Schoharie  County, 
New  York,  15;  American  Museum,  VII  (1790),  p.  296;  Washington,  Letters  on 
Agriculture  (Knight  ed.),  35-37,  107.  Brown,  in  Mass.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  1st 
series,  IX,  118,  124. 


PIONEERING  IN  THE  EIGHTEENTH!  CENTURY 


71 


of  standardized  units.  Comment  on  the  rise  in  land  values  around  Philadel¬ 
phia  in  1750  is  found  in  the  report  of  a  German  traveler,  who  wrote: 8 

“The  price  of  farms  in  Pennsylvania,  especially  round  Philadelphia,  is  already  quite 
high;  from  30  to  50  florins  are  paid  for  an  acre,  only  a  day’s  journey  from  the  city, 
although  the  ground  is  still  uncleared  forest  land.  If  a  place  is  desired  for  a  homestead, 
which  is  already  in  a  habitable  and  cultivated  condition,  containing  a  dwelling-house, 
barns  and  good  stables,  together  with  meadows,  orchards,  tilled  fields  and  sufficient  wood¬ 
land,  twice  as  much  is  asked  for  it  as  for  uncultivated  land,  the  price  being  about  one 
hundred  florins  per  acre.  Rich  Englishmen  have  already  bought  up  from  the  Indians 
all  the  remote  land  far  and  near,  where  all  is  as  yet  wild  and  wooded,  in  order  to  sell 
it  again  to  the  Europeans  who  are  coming  to  the  country.  Our  German  people  who  emi¬ 
grate  there  do  not  get  land  enough  for  nothing  upon  which  to  build  a  cottage.  The  price 
of  land  is  increasing  from  year  to  year,  especially  because  the  English  see  that  so  many 
people,  anxious  to  own  farms  or  plantations,  are  coming  to  the  country  every  year.” 

The  author  of  American  Husbandry  (1775)  9  commented  on  rising  land 
values  in  New  England. 

“Trade,  navigation,  fisheries,  increasing  population,  with  other  causes,  have  operated 
strongly  to  raise  the  value  of  all  the  estates  under  cultivation,  whose  situation  is  favour¬ 
able,  for  in  proportion  as  the  wild  country  is  taken  up  good  lands  and  convenient  situa¬ 
tions  rise  in  value ;  till  we  see  they  come,  near  the  great  towns,  to  as  high  a  value  as  in 
the  best  parts  of  Great  Britain,  for  near  Boston  there  are  lands  worth  twenty  shillings 
an  acre.” 

The  best  summary  of  the  situation  is  to  be  found  in  the  report  prepared  by 
William  Strickland  10  in  1794  for  the  English  Board  of  Agriculture.  After 
giving  a  number  of  figures  for  land  values  in  various  parts  of  New  York 
State,  he  concludes : 

“Hence  the  average  price  of  land,  in  the  old  settled  country  below  Schenectady  (re¬ 
jecting  such  as  being  mountainous  is  little  capable  of  cultivation,  and  such  as  for  mer¬ 
cantile  purposes,  or  from  being  in  the  vicinity  of  large  towns,  is  of  increased  value) 
appears  to  be  £3.  7s.  iod.  per  acre,  and  of  the  new  settled  country,  to  the  west  of  it, 
9s.  3%d.” 

Regarding  New  Jersey  and  Pennsylvania,  he  wrote:*  11 

“  The  best  land  in  Jersey  and  in  that  part  of  Pennsylvania  which  is  east  of  the  moun¬ 
tains,  exclusive  of  the  German  tract,  may  be  settled  at  about  £4.  per  acre ;  they  certainly 
average  something  more  than  the  old  part  of  New  York,  this  tract  not  being  mixed  with 
any  barren  mountains,  and  being  less  rocky  and  broken. 

“The  back  lands  of  Pennsylvania  sell  for  considerably  less  than  those  of  New  York: 
from  what  information  I  could  obtain,  I  could  not  state  them  at  more  than  3s.  or  4s. 
per  acre ;  a  great  quantity  was  upon  sale  for  less ;  the  tenure  of  them  is  less  satisfactory 
than  of  those  of  New  York,  the  titles  less  to  be  relied  upon,  and  the  whole  having  less 
credit,  many  egregious  frauds  have  been  committed  upon  purchasers,  particularly  those 
in  Europe.” 


LAND  POLICY  AND  EMIGRATION— NEW  ENGLAND. 

The  policy  adopted  in  the  eighteenth  century  by  the  northern  colonies  in 
the  disposal  of  unoccupied  lands  favored  the  dispersion  of  population  and  the 
rapid  settlement  of  new  areas.  In  the  older  New  England  towns  up  to  the 


8  Mittelberger,  Journey  to  Pennsylvania ,  118. 

9  I,  63. 

10  Observations,  12. 

11  Ibid.,  16. 


72 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


early  seventeenth  century  it  had  been  relatively  easy  for  a  newcomer  to 
obtain  free  of  cost  all  the  land  he  could  effectively  use.  During  the  eighteenth 
century,  as  the  supplies  of  undivided  land  in  the  town  commons  became 
diminished,  the  proprietors  adopted  a  less  liberal  policy  in  land  distribution.12 
About  1725  there  came  a  change  in  the  policy  of  certain  New  England  col¬ 
onies  in  the  making  of  town  grants.  The  prudent  policy  of  distributing  new 
land  purely  for  the  sake  of  settlement  was  abandoned,  and  instead  both 
Massachusetts  and  Connecticut  sold  whole  townships  to  grantees  who  in¬ 
tended  not  to  settle  but  to  resell  at  a  profit.  There  followed  a  period  (1730- 
1740)  of  speculation  in  “wild  lands,”  which,  although  in  the  end  it  proved 
disastrous  to  those  who  had  bought  large  tracts,  did  nevertheless  stimulate 
pioneering.13  A  similar  period  of  land  speculation  was  inaugurated  about 
1760,  when  Governor  Wentworth  of  New  Hampshire  sold  the  grants  of  130 
towns  in  Vermont,  chiefly  to  speculators.14  The  settlers  who  took  up  these 
lands  soon  discovered  that  the  title  to  the  whole  tract  was  disputed  by  the 
province  of  New  York  and  violence  and  bloodshed  resulted  before  the 
matter  was  adjusted.15 


IN  PENNSYLVANIA. 

In  Pennsylvania,  under  the  proprietary  government,  it  was  relatively 
easy  for  pioneers  to  acquire  vacant  land.  The  price  of  land  when  purchased 
from  the  land  office  fluctuated  between  £5  and  £15  per  100  acres  (i.  e.,  between 
is.  and  3s.  per  acre),  beside  a  small  quitrent,  and  sales  were  for  cash  and 
not  on  credit.  However,  the  great  majority  of  settlers  who  took  up  land 
in  the  back  country,  especially  in  the  period  of  great  German  immigration, 
1718-1732,  did  not  trouble  to  acquire  a  title,  but  simply  squatted  on  unoccu¬ 
pied  land.  During  the  first  half  of  the  eighteenth  century  the  management  of 
the  proprietary  lands  was  in  great  confusion  and  the  practice  of  squatting 
became  general.  By  1726  it  was  estimated  that  there  were  100,000  squatters 
and  of  670,000  acres  occupied  (1732-1740)  over  two-thirds  were  settled 
without  grants.16 

“  Squatting,  though  discouraged  by  the  proprietors,  as  it  defrauded  them  of  quitrents, 
soon  became  the  most  popular  and  regular  method  of  acquiring  land.  Squatters’  rights 
forced  their  way  from  presumptive  titles  to  an  established  position,  first  as  personalty  and 
finally  as  realty.  They  became  the  basis  of  land  transfers  through  the  customary  aliena¬ 
tion  of  improvements  instead  of  the  legal  title.  Toward  the  middle  of  the  Eighteenth 
Century  the  proprietors  were  forced  to  recognize  them  in  the  so-called  settlement  rights 
as  a  legitimate  mode  of  obtaining  title  to  land.  From  this  time  they  supplanted  office 
rights  as  the  general  basis  of  the  acquisition  and  transfer  of  land  throughout  the 
province.” 

The  lands  thus  occupied  without  title  had  eventually  to  be  paid  for  with 
interest,  but  the  squatters  were  given  the  right  of  preemption  and  thus  there 
was  virtually  established  a  credit  system  of  land  purchase  in  Pennsylvania 
which  undoubtedly  contributed  greatly  to  the  rapid  settlement  of  the  back 


12  Judd,  Hadley,  286. 

13  Mathews,  Expansion  of  New  England,  81-84,  92,  101. 

14  Turner,  in  Wisconsin  Hist.  Soc.  Proceedings  (1908),  193. 

15  Beckley,  Vermont,  66. 

10  Ballagh  in  American  Hist.  Asso.  Report  (1897),  112. 


PIONEERING  IN  THE  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY  73 

country.17  Not  until  1769  were  the  affairs  of  the  land  office  brought  into  a 
semblance  of  order.  The  township  plan  after  that  date  was  more  effectively 
carried  out,  the  size  of  grants  was  restricted,  and  actual  settlement  and 
improvement  were  required.18 

IN  NEW  YORK. 

The  land  system  of  colonial  New  York  was  less  favorable  to  the  small 
settler  than  either  that  of  New  England  or  Pennsylvania,  and  largely  on 
that  account  the  movement  into  the  back  country  was  less  vigorous  in  that 
province.  We  have  already  remarked  the  unusual  number  of  large  land 
grants  by  the  English  governors  at  the  end  of  the  seventeenth  century.  The 
practice  continued  until  the  Revolution.  A  tabulation  of  the  “  more  important 
patents,”  1700-1775.  shows  that  out  of  a  total  of  21 1  grants,  128,  or  61  per 
cent,  were  for  tracts  of  between  1,000  and  10,000  acres,  and  83  were  over 
10,000  acres.  The  largest  patents  granted  (2)  were  for  100,000  acres  each. 
The  average  grant  was  10,400  acres.19 

Tenant  farming  was  in  only  a  few  cases  successfully  established  on  the 
so-called  manors  of  New  York,  and  so  the  large  holdings  remained  for  the 
most  part  uninhabited  and  uncultivated.  Squatting  was  practiced  on  such 
tracts,  and  the  squatters  at  times  could  vindicate  their  titles  in  court,  because 
of  conflicting  grants  and  careless  surveying,  but  in  general  the  young  farmers 
looking  for  new  land  preferred  to  emigrate  to  a  colony  where  fee-simple 
grants  were  more  readily  obtained.  In  1764  Lieutenant  Governor  Colden 
wrote  to  the  Lords  of  Trade:20 

“  Your  Lordships  have  been  informed  of  several  extravagant  Grants  of  Lands  in  this 
province ;  three  of  them  contain,  as  the  proprietors  claim,  above  a  million  of  acres  each, 
several  others  above  200,000.  All  these  were  made  without  any  previous  Survey,  as  usual 
in  other  cases,  and  without  mentioning  any  quantity  of  land  intended  to  be  granted. 
Tho  these  grants  contain  a  great  part  of  the  province,  they  are  made  on  trifling  acknowl¬ 
edgements.  The  far  greater  part  of  them  still  remain  uncultivated,  without  any  benefit 
to  the  community,  and  are  likewise  a  discouragement  to  the  settling  &  improving  the 
lands  in  the  neighbourhood  of  them,  for  from  the  uncertainty  of  their  boundaries,  the 
Patentees  of  these  great  Tracts  are  daily  enlarging  their  pretensions,  and  by  tedious  & 
most  expensive  Law-suits,  distress  and  ruin  poor  families  who  have  taken  out  grants 
near  them ;  of  all  which,  I  propose  to  send  to  your  Lordships  particular  proofs  before 
winter.” 

And  a  year  later  he  wrote : 21 

“  The  uncertainty  of  the  Grant,  both  as  to  the  quantity  of  the  Land  and  boundaries 
of  the  Tract  granted,  which  in  Law  invalidates  the  grants  of  the  Crown,  turns  greatly  to 
the  advantage  of  the  owners  of  these  great  Tracts,  by  the  artifices  they  make  use  of  to 
inlarge  their  claims  perpetually.  Thereby  they  are  in  continual  contention  with  the 
Farmers  contiguous  to  them,  who  have  purchased  Bona  Fide,  and  improved  the  Lands ; 

and  by  the  expence  of  Law  Suits  many  of  the  most  industrious  Farmers  are  ruined . ” 

“  In  1774  only  1,000,000  acres  of  the  5,000,000  acres  of  the  province  were  improved,  and 
the  settlements  were  all  east  of  Utica  on  the  Mohawk,  and  were  mainly  confined  to  the 
Hudson  River,  Manhattan,  Staten  and  Long  Islands.”  22 


11  Turner,  The  Old  West,  Wisconsin  Hist.  Soc.  Proceedings  (1008),  p.  21?. 
lfe  Ballagh,  Am.  Hist.  Asso.  Report,  1897,  p.  112. 

19  French,  Gazetteer  of  New  York,  49-52. 

20  O’Callaghan,  N.  Y.  Documents  Relative  to  Colonial  History,  VII,  654. 

21  Ibid.,  VII,  795. 

22  Ballagh,  loc.  cit.,  p.  no. 


74 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


LAND  POLICY  AFTER  THE  REVOLUTION. 

After  the  Revolution  the  new  States  of  Massachusetts,  New  York,  and 
Pennsylvania  all  began  a  liberal  distribution  of  the  vacant  lands  which  thej 
had  inherited  from  the  previous  colonial  governments.  In  Pennsylvania, 
by  the  acts  of  1780  and  1783,  tracts  in  the  northwestern  part  of  the  State, 
known  as  the  Depreciation  and  Donation  Lands,  were  set  aside  for  the  sol¬ 
diers  of  the  Revolutionary  War  and  were  later  opened  to  settlement.  Western 
lands  were  at  that  date  not  greatly  in  demand,  and  many  of  the  soldiers  sold 
out  their  rights  to  speculators  at  low  prices.23  A  land  office  was  opened  in 
1781  and  lands  were  sold  at  prices  varying  with  the  location  from  £3  to  £30 
for  100  acres.24  In  1792  a  general  act  was  passed  for  opening  the  unsettled 
lands  in  the  Commonwealth  for  settlement  and  improvement.  The  price  of 
land  was  reduced,  the  maximum  now  being  £7  10s.  per  100  acres  for  land 
north  and  west  of  the  Ohio  and  Allegheny  Rivers.  A  limit  of  400  acies  was 
set  on  all  grants,  preemption  rights  on  that  amount  being  granted  to  settlers 
already  in  possession.  Actual  settlement  by  purchasers  was  made  a  condition 
for  retention  of  title.25 


LAND  SPECULATION  IN  NEW  YORK. 


In  New  York,  also,  vacant  lands,  the  so-called  Bounty  Lands  in  the  west¬ 
ern  part  of  the  State,  were  distributed  to  Revolutionary  soldiers.26  A  tract 
of  about  1,800,000  acres  was  laid  out  in  square  townships  of  24,000  acres 
which  were  divided  into  200-acre  lots.  Private  soldiers  received  600  acres 
and  officers  larger  amounts  in  proportion  to  their  rank.  As  in  Pennsylvania, 
large  amounts  of  the  Bounty  Lands  got  into  the  hands  of  speculators,  the 
soldiers  having  sold  out  their  rights  at  ridiculously  low  prices.27  In  1786 
an  act  was  passed  whose  title  significantly  read  “  An  Act  for  the  speedy  sale 
of  the  Unappropriated  Lands  within  this  state.”  Having  provided  for  laying 
out  townships  of  64,000  acres,  divided  into  lots  of  640  acres  each,  the  law 
fixed  a  minimum  price  of  1  shilling  per  acre  and  required  one-fourth  of 
the  purchase  price  to  be  paid  down  and  the  balance  within  60  days.  Actual 
settlement  within  7  years  was  a  condition  for  a  valid  title.28  In  1791  the 
act  was  amended  so  that,  with  certain  exceptions,  the  State  lands  might  be 
sold  by  the  commissioners  of  the  land  office  “  in  such  parcels,  on  such  terms, 
and  in  such  manner  as  they  shall  judge  most  conducive  to  the  interest  of 

this  State . ”  29  Thus,  of  course,  the  1  shilling  minimum  price  was 

abolished.  An  orgy  of  prodigal  disposition  of  the  state  domain  followed, 
over  5,500,000  acres  being  sold  in  a  single  year,  the  State  treasury  receiving 
only  £412,173,  or  on  an  average  is.  6d.  per  acre  for  the  land.  The  largest 
single  tract  sold  contained  3,635,200  acres  and  brought  only  8d.  per  acre.30 


23  Agnew,  Northwest  Pennsylvania ,  28;  Feree,  Pennsylvania,  194-198. 

24  Read,  Abridgement  of  the  Laws  of  Pennsylvania  (1801),  208-219. 

25  Ibid.,  219—224. 

26  By  the  acts  of  25  July,  1782  and  n  May,  1784.  See  Laws  of  New  York  (Cook  edition), 

5th  Session,  1782,  chap.  77,  P-  521 ;  6th  Session,  1784,  chap.  63,  p.  731. 

27  Maude,  Visit  to  Niagara,  38. 

28  Laws  of  New  York,  9th  Session  (1786),  chap.  67,  p.  334. 

29  Ibid.,  14th  Session,  chap.  42,  p.  245. 

30  O’Callaghan,  Documentary  History  of  New  York,  III,  1069-1083. 


PIONEERING  IN  THE  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


75 


THE  WILD  LANDS  OF  MAINE. 

Massachusetts,  too,  attempted  to  replenish  her  empty  treasury  after  the 
Revolution  by  land  sales.  The  District  of  Maine,  then  a  part  of  the  State 
of  Massachusetts,  was  still  largely  unoccupied  and  contained  millions  of 
acres  of  wild  lands.  The  land  system  in  Maine,  as  we  have  seen,  had 
differed  from  that  of  Southern  New  England  in  the  greater  frequency  of 
large  giants  directly  to  individuals.  Titles  had  become  uncertain  owing  to 
the  overlapping  of  grants,  and  settlement  had  been  hindered.  For  this  reason, 
and  also  on  account  of  the  severe  losses  which  the  exposed  Maine  Coast  suf- 
feied  during  the  French  and  Indian  wars,  settlement  was  hindered,  and  not 
until  after  1763  was  progress  made  into  the  back  country.31 

Beginning  in  i/Sj,  however,  a  land  office  was  established  and  a  campaign 
of  land  selling  was  inaugurated.  In  the  years  1785-1792  something  over 
600,000  acres  were  disposed  of  at  an  average  price  of  41.4  cents  per  acre. 
In  l793  a  sudden  fever  of  land  speculation  raised  the  sales  for  that  year 
to  over  2,000,000  acres,  but  the  average  price  fell  to  12^  cents  per  acre. 
Hoping  to  check  the  speculative  mania,  the  legislature  in  1795  suspended 
all  sales.  But  speculation  nevertheless  continued,  for  the  large  tracts  of  land 
which  had  been  liberally  granted  in  aid  of  educational  institutions  and  for 
internal  improvements  were  now  placed  on  the  market  in  an  effort  to  convert 
them  into  cash.32 

Massachusetts  had  acquired  in  1786  a  6,000,000-acre  tract  in  Western  New 
\  ork  in  settlement  of  her  claims  in  that  region,  and  between  1787  and  1793 
this  entire  tract  was  placed  on  the  market  and  sold,  mostly  to  companies 
organized  for  the  purpose  of  resale  at  a  profit.  About  2,500,000  acres  were 
taken  in  a  single  tract  by  Messrs.  Gorham  and  Phelps  and  another  large  tract 
was  sold  to  the  Holland  Land  Company.33 

LAND  POLICY  SUMMARIZED. 

In  summary,  it  is  clear  that  the  land  policy  of  all  the  colonies  from  1700 
to  1775,  with  the  exception  of  New  York,  favored  rapid  settlement  of  the 
back  country.  After  1780,  liberality  was  changed  into  reckless  prodigality, 
and  under  the  stimulus  of  financial  necessity  great  tracts  were  thrown  on 
the  market.  Much  of  the  land  was  sold  directly  to  middlemen,  and  other 
tracts  came  into  their  hands  indirectly  by  sale  from  the  original  grantees. 
The  temporary  results  were  undoubtedly  a  great  stimulus  to  emigration  to 
the  frontier.  The  land  companies  exerted  themselves  to  find  settlers  to  whom 
they  could  resell  their  holdings.  Every  settler  on  a  new  tract  enhanced  the 
value  of  the  unsold  land.  To  stimulate  sales,  the  land  companies  extended 
long  credits,  whereas  purchases  directly  from  the  States  were  usually  for 
cash  or  on  from  2  to  12  months  credit.  In  the  long  run,  however,  there 
appeared  glaring  evils.  In  the  haste  to  dispose  of  lands,  surveys  were  care¬ 
lessly  made  and  disputed  boundary-lines  led  to  uncertain  titles.  A  particu¬ 
larly  bad  situation  of  this  sort  arose  in  Maine,  where  the  settlers  on  the 

Sullivan,  Maine,  43,  44  ;  Lincoln,  in  Mass.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  1st  Series,  IV,  140 
2  Green  leaf,  Survey,, of  Maine,  39SH40I,  428.  Felt,  in  Am.  Statistical  Asso.  Collections, 
75~7o- 

33  Turner,  Holland  Purchase,  325,  326,  401. 


76 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


so-called  Kennebec  Purchase,  fearing  to  lose  their  lands  and  improvements, 
were  kept  in  a  state  of  unrest  for  almost  a  generation,  and  were  finally  stirred 
to  armed  insurrection  before  the  conflicting  claims  were  quieted.34  Absentee 
ownership,  also,  was  introduced  and  complaints  became  frequent  that  the 
progress  of  new  communities  was  hindered  by  the  indifference  of  absent 
landowners  to  local  improvements  and  by  the  existence  of  large  tracts,  held 
out  of  cultivation.  Finally,  the  system  of  long-time  credit  led  to  inevitable 
disputes  between  the  settlers  and  the  land  companies.  The  pioneer’s  life 
was  arduous,  as  we  shall  see,  and  the  task  of  clearing  absorbed  so  much 
of  his  energies  for  the  first  few  years  that  he  had  little  opportunity  to 
raise  surplus  crops.  When  he  finally  had  a  surplus,  high  transportation 
costs  often  shut  him  off  from  a  market.  The  result  was  that  a  large  proportion 
were  unable  to  pay  their  annual  installments  as  they  fell  due.  The  threat  of 
ejection  led  to  violent  antipathy  to  the  land  company,  and  in  some  cases  to 
violent  action  on  the  part  of  the  settlers  for  the  redress  of  their  “  grievances.” 

OTHER  CAUSES  OF  EMIGRATION  TO  THE  FRONTIER. 

Combined  with  the  economic  motive,  the  demand  for  new  soil,  were 
undoubtedly  others  more  psychological  in  nature.  Some  men  were  unable  to 
fit  into  the  rigid,  Puritanical  social  and  ecclesiastical  systems.  They  emi¬ 
grated  in  order  to  breathe  the  freer,  more  unconventional  atmosphere  of  the 
pioneer  communities.  Others  were  simply  infected  by  the  contagious  spirit ; 
their  friends  had  gone  or  were  going;  they  too  wanted  to  see  the  new 
country  and  to  live  its  new  life.  Dwight  takes  account  of  these  and  other 
motives  in  the  following  passage  from  his  Travels : 35 

“  In  the  formation  of  Colonies,  those,  who  are  first  inclined  to  emigrate,  are  usually 
such,  as  have  met  with  difficulties  at  home.  These  are  commonly  joined  by  persons,  who, 
having  large  families  and  small  farms,  are  induced,  for  the  sake  of  settling  their  children 
comfortably,  to  seek  for  new  and  cheaper  lands.  To  both  are  always  added  the  dis¬ 
contented,  the  enterprising,  the  ambitious,  and  the  covetous.  Many  of  the  first,  and  some 
of  all  these  classes,  are  found  in  every  new  American  country,  within  ten  years  after 
its  settlement  has  commenced.  From  this  period,  kindred,  friendship,  and  former 
neighbourhood,  prompt  others  to  follow  them.  Others,  still,  are  allured  by  the  prospect 
of  gain,  presented  in  every  new  country  to  the  sagacious,  from  the  purchase  and  sale 
of  new  lands :  while  not  a  small  number  are  influenced  by  the  brilliant  stories,  which 
everywhere  are  told  concerning  most  tracts  during  the  early  progress  of  their  settlement.” 

GENERAL  DESCRIPTION  OF  PIONEER  FARMING. 

A  general  view  of  the  life  and  work  of  the  pioneer  farmers  may  be  gained 
from  the  description  by  a  French  traveler  36  of  what  he  saw  in  western  Con¬ 
necticut  in  i 780 : 

“  I  saw,  for  the  first  time,  what  I  have  since  observed  a  hundred  times ;  for  in  fact, 
whatever  mountains  I  have  climbed,  whatever  forests  I  have  traversed,  whatever  bye- 

34  Gardiner,  in  Maine  Hist.  Soc.  Collections ,  1st  series,  II,  288-292 ;  Felt,  in  Am.  Statistical 

Asso.  Collections,  I,  78. 

35  Travels,  II,  458  (edition  of  1821).  In  the  succeeding  pages,  458-460,  one  may  read 

description  of  the  successive  stages  in  the  settlement  of  new  land,  from  pioneerin 
to  ultimate  cultivation  in  well-settled  communities,  which  has  attained  the  rank  of 
classic  in  economic  history. 

30  Chastellux,  Travels,  34. 


nJ  be  03 


PIONEERING  IN  THE  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY 


77 


paths  I  have  followed,  I  have  never  travelled  three  miles  without  meeting  with  a  new 
settlement,  either  beginning  to  take  form  or  already  in  cultivation.  The  following  is  the 
manner  of  proceeding  in  these  improvements  or  new  settlements.  Any  man  who  is  able 
to  procure  a  capital  of  five  or  six  hundred  livres  of  our  money,  or  about  twenty-five 
pounds  sterling,  and  who  has  a  strength  and  inclination  to  work,  may  go  into  the  woods 
and  purchase  a  portion  of  one  hundred  and  fifty  to  two  hundred  acres  of  land,  which 
se  doin  costs  him  more  than  a  dollar  or  four  shillings  and  sixpence  an  acre,  a  small 
part  of  which  only  he  pays  in  ready  money.  There  he  conducts  a  cow,  some  pigs,  or  a 
full  sow,  and  two  indifferent  horses  which  do  not  cost  him  more  than  four  guineas  each 
To  these  precautions  he  adds  that  of  having  a  provision  of  flour  and  cider.  Provided 
with  this  first  capital,  he  begins  by  felling  all  the  smaller  trees,  and  some  strong  branches 
of  the  large  ones :  these  he  makes  use  of  as  fences  to  the  first  field  he  wishes  to  clear ; 
he  next  boldly  attacks  those  immense  oaks,  or  pines,  which  one  would  take  for  the 
ancient  lords  of  the  territory  he  is  usurping;  he  strips  them  of  their  bark,  or  lays  them 
open  all  round  with  his  axe.  These  trees  mortally  wounded,  are  the  next  spring  robbed 
ot  their  honours ;  their  leaves  no  longer  spring,  their  branches  fall,  and  their  trunk  be¬ 
comes  a  hideous  skeleton.  This  trunk  still  seems  to  brave  the  efforts  of  the  new  colonist- 
but  where  there  are  the  smallest  chinks  or  crevices,  it  is  surrounded  by  fire,  and  the 
flames  consume  what  the  iron  was  unable  to  destroy.  But  it  is  enough  for  the  small  trees 
to  be  felled  and  the  great  ones  to  lose  their  sap.  This  object  completed,  the  ground 
is  cleared;  the  air  and  the  sun  begin  to  operate  upon  that  earth  which  is  wholly  formed 
of  rotten  vegetables, .  and  teems  with  the  latent  principles  of  production.  The  grass 
grows  rapidly ;  there  is  pasturage  for  the  cattle  the  very  first  year ;  after  which  they  are 
left  to  increase,  or  fresh  ones  are  brought,  and  they  are  employed  in  tilling  a  piece  of 
ground  which  yields  the  enormous  increase  of  twenty  or  thirty  fold.  The  next  year  the 
same  course  is  repeated ;  when,  at  the  end  of  two  years,  the  planter  has  wherewithal  to 
subsist,  and  even  to  send  some  articles  to  market :  at  the  end  of  four  or  five  years  he 
completes  the  payment  of  his  land,  and  finds  himself  a  comfortable  planter.  Then’ his 
dwelling,  which  at  first  was  no  better  than  a  large  hut  formed  by  a  square  of  the  trunks 
o  trees,  placed  one  upon  another,  with  the  intervals  filled  by  mud,  changes  into  a  hand¬ 
some  wooden  house,  where  he  contrives  more  convenient,  and  certainly  much  cleaner 
apartments  than  those  in  the  greatest  part  of  our  small  towns.  This  is  the  work  of 
ree  weeks  or  a  month.  His  first  habitation,  that  of  eight  and  forty  hours.  I  shall  be 
asked,  perhaps,  how  one  man  or  one  family  can  be  so  quickly  lodged ;  I  answer,  that  in 
America  a  man  is  never  alone,  never  an  isolated  being.  The  neighbours,  for  they  are 
every  where  to  be  found,  make  it  a  point  of  hospitality  to  aid  the  new  farmer.  A  cask 
of  cider  drank  in  common,  and  with  gaiety,  or  a  gallon  of  rum,  are  the  only  recompense 
for  these  services  Such  are  the  means  by  which  North-America,  which  one  hundred  years 
ago  was  nothing  but  a  vast  forest,  is  peopled  with  three  millions  of  inhabitants ;  and  such 
is  the  immense,  and  certain  benefit  of  agriculture,  that  notwithstanding  the  war,  it  not 
only  maintains  itself  where  ever  it  has  been  established,  but  it  extends  to  places  which 
seem  the  least  favourable  to  its  introduction.  Four  years  ago,  one  might  have  travelled 
ten  miles  in  the  woods  I  traversed,  without  seeing  a  single  habitation.” 


METHODS  OF  CLEARING. 

In  clearing  the  ground  the  first  step  was  to  cut  down,  grub  out,  and  burn 
the  underbrush.  Then  the  larger  timber  might  be  destroyed  either  by 
girdling  or  by  cutting  it  down  and  burning  it.  It  is  hard  to  distinguish  the 
two  systems .  both  were  used  in  the  same  localities  and  were  sometimes 
combined  on  the  same  tract.  Cutting  down  the  timber  was  probably  the 
prevailing  method  in  northern  New  England,  in  fact  it  was  sometimes  called 
the  “  Yankee  system,”  37  but  girdling  was  also  practiced  in  New  England.33 
In  the  region  originally  settled  by  the  Swedes,  on  both  sides  of  the  Delaware 


37  Lorain,  in  Philadelphia  Agric.  Soc.  Memoirs,  III  (1814),  p.  112. 

38  See  Dwight’s  description,  Travels  (1821  ed.),  II,  125. 


78 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


River,  girdling  was  the  favored  method.39  In  Pennsylvania,  the  thorough¬ 
going  German  settlers  in  the  southeast  practiced  the  Yankee  system.  Dr. 
Rush  40  wrote : 

“  In  clearing  new  land  they  do  not  girdle  the  trees  simply,  and  leave  them  to  perish  in 
the  ground,  as  is  the  custom  of  their  English  or  Irish  neighbors ;  but  they  generally  cut 
them  down  and  burn  them.  In  destroying  under-wood  and  bushes,  they  generally  grub 
them  out  of  the  ground ;  by  which  means  a  field  is  as  fit  for  cultivation  the  second  year 
after  it  is  cleared,  as  it  is  in  twenty  years  afterwards.” 

Elsewhere  in  Pennsylvania  and  in  New  York  both  methods  of  clearing 
were  practiced.41 

Girdling  was  more  economical  of  labor  at  the  beginning,  but  eventually 
the  dead  trees  fell  and  must  be  removed,  and  in  falling  they  endangered  the 
lives  of  farmers  and  their  stock.  The  type  of  pioneer  who  expected  to 
remain  only  a  few  years  on  the  tract  he  had  cleared,  and  then  sell  out  and 
move  farther  into  the  wilderness,  usually  practiced  cutting  and  burning 
instead  of  girdling.  The  ashes  from  his  great  piles  of  logs  gave  him,  when 
converted  into  potash,  a  cash  crop  in  the  first  season,  whereas  his  neighbor 
who  girdled  his  trees  might  have  to  wait  several  seasons  before  he  had  a 
salable  surplus.  The  fact  that  the  humus  in  the  soil  was  often  destroyed  by 
his  huge  fires  did  not  worry  the  “  exploiting  ”  pioneer  who  did  not  intend 
to  settle  permanently  and  cultivate  the  land.42 

PIONEER  CROPS  AND  TILLAGE. 

On  the  land  thus  cleared  the  pioneer  raised  chiefly  grain  crops.  Indian 
corn  was  usually  the  first  crop  on  new  land,  although  under  some  circum¬ 
stances  wheat  or  rye  was  planted.  Thus  in  northern  Vermont  and  in  the 
Mohawk  Valley  wheat  was  more  usually  sown  on  new  land,  probably  because 
of  favorable  marketing  conditions.43  Rye  was  a  favored  crop  on  new  land 
in  New  Hampshire.  Belknap  wrote: 44 

“  Of  all  grains,  winter  rye  thrives  best  on  new  lands,  and  Indian  corn,  or  barley,  on 
the  old.  Barley  does  not  succeed  well  in  the  new  land;  nor  is  flax  raised  with  any 
advantage,  until  the  land  has  been  cultivated  for  some  years.  The  same  may  be  said 
of  oats  and  peas ;  but  all  kinds  of  esculent  roots,  are  much  larger  and  sweeter  in  the  virgin 
soil,  than  in  any  other.” 

It  was  observed  in  the  more  northern  districts  and  in  the  higher  altitudes 
that  Indian  corn  did  not  yield  as  well  on  the  new  lands  as  on  the  old,  and 
it  was  claimed  that  the  ground  must  first  be  prepared  for  corn  by  some  other 
crop.  Belknap  45  explained  the  matter  by  reference  to  the  date  of  planting. 
In  the  regions  where  the  growing-season  was  short,  the  clearing  process 


39  Acrelius,  in  Pennsylvania  Hist.  Soc.  Memoirs,  XI,  147. 

40  Account  of  the  German  Inhabitants  of  Pennsylvania  (1789).  Reprinted  in  Pennsyl¬ 

vania  German  Society  Proceedings  and  Addresses,  XIX  (1910),  58. 

41  Cooper,  Information  Respecting  America,  116-119;  Lorain,  Philadelphia  Agric.  Soc. 

Memoirs,  III  (1814),  p.  112. 

42  On  the  whole  subject  of  clearing,  see  Belknap,  New  Hampshire,  III,  131-137- 

43  Richard  Smith,  Journal,  19;  Miller  and  Wells,  Ryegate  (Vermont),  193;  Orleans 

County  (Vermont)  Hist.  Soc.  Proceedings  (1889-91),  p.  39;  Watson,  Essex  County 
(New  York),  479. 

44 History  of  New  Hampshire,  III  (1792),  136.  See  also  Runnels,  Sanbornton  (New 
Hampshire) ,  I,  59. 

45  New  Hampshire,  III  (1792),  136. 


PIONEERING  IN  THE  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY  79 

postponed  the  date  of  planting  so  long  that  corn  did  not  come  to  full  matur¬ 
ity.  Potatoes  were  an  eighteenth  century  innovation  among  pioneer  crops. 
Like  maize,  they  were  planted  with  the  hoe,  usually  without  plowing.  The 
seeds  of  wheat,  rye,  and  other  grains  were  raked  in  by  hand  or  scratched 
in  with  a  harrow.46 

LIVESTOCK,  HAY,  AND  PASTURAGE. 

A  grass  crop  often  followed  two  years  of  grains,  the  seed  having  been 
sown,  perhaps,  with  rye  or  wheat,  but  the  few  animals  which  the  pioneer 
took  out  with  him  to  his  new  home  gathered  most  of  their  nourishment 
from  the  woods  and  natural  meadows.  The  supply  of  hay  in  new  settlements 
was  often  insufficient  for  winter  fodder  and  cows  went  farrow  and  in  some 
cases  literally  starved  to  death.4'  The  importance  of  livestock  in  pioneer 
agriculture  increased  in  regions  where  cattle  could  be  successfully  fattened 
for  market.  In  some  regions  of  New  Hampshire  and  Maine  cattle  were 
driven  into  the  new  tract  to  be  pastured  there  in  advance  of  settlement. 
Where  there  was  but  little  underbrush  the  cattle  browsed  in  the  woodlands, 
and  meanwhile  the  settlers  brought  their  cleared  lands  into  mowing  as  soon 
as  possible.  In  New  Hampshire  many  farmers  in  the  old  towns  fatted 
cattle  for  market  on  land  in  new  settlements  which  they  had  cleared  and 
brought  into  grass.48 

THE  IMPORTANCE  OF  BY-INDUSTRIES.— POTASH  AND 

MAPLE  SUGAR. 

The  pioneer  farmer  was  often  engaged  in  accessory  occupations  which, 
although  furnishing  him  an  important  source  of  income,  often  interfered 
with  farming  operations  and  hindered  the  development  of  good  agricultural 
practice.  Fishing  and  hunting  often  took  up  a  large  share  of  his  time,  and 
where  there  were  suitable  water  courses  for  floating  logs  to  the  saw  mills, 
lumbering  was  a  favorite  occupation.  In  districts  where  much  lumbering 
was  carried  on,  farming  was  generally  in  a  bad  state.  Belknap 49  wrote : 

“The  best  season  for  sawing  logs  is  the  spring,  when  the  rivers  are  high;  this  is 
also  the  time  for  ploughing  and  planting.  He  who  works  in  the  saw-mill  at  that  time, 
must  buy  his  bread  and  clothing,  and  the  hay  for  his  cattle,  with  his  lumber;  and  he 
generally  anticipates  the  profit  of  his  labor.  Long  credit  is  a  disadvantage  to  him ;  and 
the  too  free  indulgence  of  spirituous  liquor,  to  which  this  class  of  people  are  much  ad¬ 
dicted,  hurts  their  health,  their  morals  and  their  interest.  They  are  always  in  debt, 
and  frequently  at  law.  Their  families  are  ill  provided  with  necessaries,  and  their 
children  are  without  education  or  morals.” 


4(5  Lorain,  in  Philadelphia  Agric.  Soc.  Memoirs,  III  (1814),  p.  112;  Cooper,  Information 
Respecting  America,  113,  116-119;  Notes  on  Lancaster  (New  Hampshire),  in 
Massachusetts  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  2d  series,  III,  98,  note  2;  Richard  Smith, 
Journal,  21. 

47  Runnels,  Sanbornton  ( New  Hampshire),  I,  60;  Smith,  Rev.  Thomas,  Journal,  266, 

267,  269. 

48  Belknap,  New  Hampshire,  III,  135 ;  Lincoln,  in  Mass.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  1st 

series,  IV,  145;  Coffin,  in  Maine  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  1st  series,  IV,  288. 

49  New  Hampshire,  III,  261 ;  see  also  Mass.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  1st  series,  IV,  90,  149; 

Kendall,  Travels,  III,  72-84;  Watson,  Essex  County  (New  York),  478. 


80 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


Where  saw-logs  could  not  be  gotten  to  mills  the  making  of  potash  for 
sale  was  often  an  important  by-industry.  A  “  potash  house,”  to  which  ashes 
were  brought  by  the  farmers  and  converted  into  potash  and  pearl  ash,  was 
usually  found  in  new  settlements  in  New  England  and  New  York,  and  less 
frequently  in  Pennsylvania.50  The  method  of  manufacturing  potash  as  then 
practiced  was  described  by  La  Rochefoucauld  51  as  follows : 

“  Large  tubs,  with  a  double  bottom,  are  filled  with  ashes ;  the  uppermost  bottom, 
which  contains  several  holes,  is  covered  with  ashes,  about  ten  or  eleven  inches  deep, 
while  the  under  part  of  the  tub  is  filled  with  straw  or  hay.  Water,  being  poured  over 
the  ashes,  extracts  the  particles  of  salt,  and  discharges  all  the  heterogeneous  matter  which 
it  may  yet  contain  on  the  layer  of  hay  or  straw.  The  lie  is  drawn  off  by  means  of  a 
cock,  and  if  it  should  not  yet  have  attained  a  sufficient  degree  of  strength,  poured  again 
over  the  ashes.  The  lie  is  deemed  sufficiently  strong  when  an  egg  swims  on  it.  I  his  lie 
is  afterward  boiled  in  large  iron  cauldrons,  which  are  constantly  filled  out  of  other 
cauldrons,  in  which  lie  is  likewise  boiling  ....  This  salt  is  of  a  black  colour,  and 
called  black  potash.  Some  manufacturers  leave  the  potash  in  this  state  in  the  cauldron, 
and  encrease  the  fire,  by  means  of  which  the  oil  is  disengaged  from  the  salt  in  a  thick 
smoke,  and  the  black  potash  assumes  a  grey  colour,  in  which  state  it  is  packed  up  in 

barrels  for  sale .  . 

“  Pearlash  is  potash  purified  by  calcination.  To  this  end  the  potash  is  put  into  a  kiln, 
constructed  in  an  oval  form,  of  plaster  of  Paris ;  the  inside  of  which  being  made  other¬ 
wise  perfectly  close,  is  horizontally  intersected  by  an  iron  grate,  on  which  the  potash 
is  placed.  Under  this  grate  a  fire  is  made,  and  the  heat,  reverberated  by  the  arched  upper 
part  of  the  kiln,  compleats  the  calcination,  and  converts  the  potash  into  pearlash ,  . 

The  process  of  calcination  lasts  about  an  hour.” 

The  apparatus  necessary  for  this  manufacture  was  inexpensive,  the  largest 
outlay  being  for  the  purchase  of  the  kettles  in  which  the  lye  was  boiled.  The 
products,  pearlash  and  potash,  were  used  to  some  extent  in  the  household 
in  making  soap,  in  scouring  wool,  and  in  bleaching  and  dyeing  cloth.  The 
larger  part  of  the  output  was  sold,  partly  for  use  in  glass-making  and  other 
manufactures,  and  partly  for  export. 

Maple  sugar  was  another  important  by-product  of  pioneer  agriculture. 
Williams  52  wrote : 

“  The  manufacture  of  maple  sugar  is  also  an  article  of  great  importance  to  the  state 
[Vermont].  Perhaps  two  thirds  of  the  families  are  engaged  in  this  business  in  the 
spring,  and  they  make  more  sugar  than  is  used  among  the  people.  Considerable  quantities 
are  carried  to  the  shop  keepers;  which  always  find  a  ready  sale,  and  good  pay.  The 
business  is  now  carried  on,  under  the  greatest  disadvantages :  Without  proper  con¬ 
veniences,  instruments,  or  works ;  solely  by  the  exertions  of  private  families,  in  the 
woods,  and  without  any  other  conveniencies  than  one  or  two  iron  kettles,  the  largest 
of  which  will  not  hold  more  than  four  or  five  pailfulls.  Under  all  these  disadvantages, 
it  is  common  for  a  family  to  make  two  or  three  hundred  pounds  of  maple  sugar  in  three 
or  four  weeks.” 

The  production  of  maple  sugar  was  found  in  the  back  settlements  of  New 
England  and  New  York,  and  in  Pennsylvaia  as  well,  though  perhaps  less 
generally.53 

50  Williams,  Vermont,  II,  361;  Graham,  Descriptive  Sketch  of  Vermont,  40;  Cooper, 

Information  Respecting  America,  143 1  Campbell,  Travels,  268,  285. 

51  Travels,  1799  Edition,  I,  385.  .  , 

52  Vermont,  II,  363.  For  descriptions  of  the  process  of  making  maple  sugar  see  Dwight, 

Travels  (1821  ed.),  I,  40;  Belknap,  New  Hampshire,  III,  II3- 

53  Richard  Smith,  Journal  26;  Mittleberger,  Journey  to  Pennsylvania,  Coxe,  View 

of  the  United  States,  65. 


PIONEERING  IN  THE  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY  81 

THE  PROGRESS  OF  PIONEER  COMMUNITIES.— HARDSHIPS 

OF  PIONEERING. 

The  first  years  of  a  pioneer’s  life  were  full  of  exhausting  toil  and  often 
marked  b\  the  most  discouraging  hardships.  Clearing  the  woods  wras  a  slow 
process.  The  typical  settler  would  clear,  perhaps,  on  the  average  from  i  to 
3  acres  a  year.  T  hose  who  were  exceptionally  energetic  or  who  had  exception- 
all}  large  families  would  do  considerably  better.  In  Concord,  New  Hampshire, 
at  the  end  of  5  years  several  of  the  settlers  had  as  much  as  12  acres  cleared, 
fenced,  and  ploughed,  or  in  mowing.  One  settler  with  5  grown  sons  had  broken 
up,  cleared,  and  mowed  more  than  80  acres,  besides  erecting  “  very  consider¬ 
able  buildings.  At  the  end  of  the  first  10  years  in  another  New  England 
town  every  settler  had  at  least  15  acres  cleared  and  some  had  50  acres.55 
If  all  went  well  at  the  end  of  4  or  5  years  the  settler  might  expect  to  be  fairly 
comfortably  fixed,  at  least  as  regards  food  and  shelter.  In  the  meanwhile, 
however,  he  and  his  family  might  have  been  facing  death  from  starvation 
and  exposure.  Until  the  first  corn  crop  was  harvested  grain  must  be  brought 
in  from  outside.  Of  the  Sandy  River  settlement  in  Ntaine,  Allen  wrote  1 56 

^  No  corn  could  be  had  by  the  new  settlers  the  first  summer,  nearer  than  Fort 
Western  (Augusta),  40  miles  j  several  of  them  had  to  go  on  foot  to  that  place  and  carry 
a  basket  of  corn  on  their  backs,  first  to  WInthrop  to  mill  and  then  home  to  keep  their 
families  from  starving ,  many  expedients  were  resorted  to,  to  allay  the  cravings  of 
hunger ,  some  lived  for  several  days  at  a  time  on  greens ;  some  dug  up  their  potatoes  after 
they  were  planted,  cut  out  and  replanted  the  eyes  and  ate  the  rest.  After  three  or  four 
months,  when  green  corn  was  fit  to  pick  and  potatoes  large  enough  to  dig,  all  were  relieved 
essentially.  The  months  of  May,  June  and  July,  1781,  formed  the  most  distressing  period 
in  the  settlement  of  Sandy  River.  After  the  corn  crop  came  off  in  the  fall,  almost  every 
one  had  a  tolerable  supply ;  one  settler  raised  a  little  wheat  that  summer ;  but  then  there 
was  no  mill  within  40  miles,  and  no  way  to  go  to  mill  but  on  foot,  till  they  could  go  by 
sledding  in  the  winter.  Several  prepared  large  samp  mortars,57  with  a  spring  pole  by 

w  ich  a  man  could  pound  a  bushel  a  day  so  as  to  make  one  half  fit  for  bread ;  the  other 
half  made  good  hominy.” 

The  situation  described  above  is  perhaps  extreme,  but  it  is  abundantly 
evident  that  if  the  pioneers  had  depended  on  the  products  of  their  fields  and 
on  their  domestic  animals  for  food  they  would  have  had  very  little  to  eat. 
As  it  was,  meat  was  rarely  tasted,  unless  it  were  game,  and  the  nuts  and 
berries  of  the  forest  were  welcome  additions  to  brown  bread,  pea  or  bean 
porridge,  and  baked  pumpkin.58  As  the  settlement  grew  older  less  reliance 
was  placed  on  the  forest  for  food  resources,  except  by  the  less  thrifty  and 
industrious,  who  could  not  settle  down  to  the  regular  tasks  of  farming. 

The  house  of  the  pioneer,  the  often-described  log  hut,  was  neither  a  com¬ 
fortable  nor  a  hygienic  dwelling,  Belknap  59  wrote  : 

“  They  erect  a  square  building  of  poles,  notched  at  the  ends  to  keep  them  fast  together. 
The  crevices  are  plaistered  with  clay  or  the  stiffest  earth  which  can  be  had,  mixed  with 

54  Bouton,  Concord,  New  Hampshire,  128-131. 

55  Miller  and  Wells,  Rye  gate,  Vermont,  96. 

5G  In  Maine  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  IV,  39. 

57  The  samp  mortars  used  on  Long  Island  are  described  in  Furman,  Long  Island  Antiaui- 

ties,  I,  227. 

58  Miller  and  Wells,  Ryegate,  Vermont,  94,  190;  Leonard,  Dublin,  New  Hampshire  280, 

283;  Dwight,  Travels  (ed.  1821),  II,  313. 

69  New  Hampshire,  III  (1792),  258;  see  also  Leonard,  Dublin,  New  Hampshire,  279,  28r. 

7 


82 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


moss  or  straw.  The  roof  is  either  bark  or  split  boards.  The  chimney  a  pile  of  stones ; 
within  which  a  fire  is  made  on  the  ground,  and  a  hole  is  left  in  the  roof  for  the  smoke  to 
pass  out.  Another  hole  is  made  in  the  side  of  the  house  for  a  window,  which  is  occa¬ 
sionally  closed  with  a  wooden  shutter . Ovens  are  built  at  a  small  distance  from  the 

houses,  of  the  best  stones  which  can  be  found,  cemented  and  plaistered  with  clay 

or  stiff  earth.” 


In  such  “  dark,  dirty  and  dismal  ”  habitations  the  pioneer  family  lived 
for  at  least  the  first  io  or  15  years,  and  often  much  longer.  In  Chester, 
New  Hampshire,  the  first  frame  house  was  erected  in  1732,  13  years  after 
the  first  settlement ; 60  in  Hallowell,  Maine,  most  of  the  inhabitants  were 
still  living  in  log  huts  in  1784, 61  about  25  years  after  the  first  settlement; 
and  in  Ryegate,  Vermont,  settled  in  1775,  log  houses  were  still  occupied  in 


1865.62 


SUMMARY. — PIONEERING  A  PROCESS  OF  CAPITAL¬ 
MAKING. 

It  would  seem  from  the  foregoing  description  that  the  economic  struggle 
on  the  frontier  must  have  been  more  severe  than  in  the  older-settled  com¬ 
munities.  The  pioneer  family  undoubtedly  worked  harder,  and  for  the  first 
few  years  at  least  enjoyed  less  in  the  way  of  comforts  and  satisfactions  in 
return  for  their  efforts.  Their  houses  were  less  comfortable,  their  food 
and  clothing  were  more  scanty,  and  in  general  their  standard  of  living  was 
lower.  Judging  by  the  pioneer’s  consumption  of  economic  goods,  we  should 
conclude  that  his  income  was  small  and  that  on  the  whole  there  was  little 

profit  in  pioneer  farming.  #  ••111 

But  such  a  judgment  would  be  mistaken.  The  pioneer  did  indeed  take 

out  only  a  meager  income  from  his  farm  in  the  first  5  or  10  years>  tnR 
income  taken  out  was  often  only  a  small  part  of  the  total  income  which 
accrued  during  that  period.  In  his  first  years  the  pioneer  was  chiefly  engaged 
in  producing  capital  goods.  There  are  occasional  cases  recorded  of  woodland 
farming  with  considerable  initial  capital,  where  hundreds  of  acres  were 
cleared  and  brought  into  cultivation  with  the  aid  of  indentured  servants, 
negro  slaves,  and  hired  laborers.63  But  as  a  rule  the  pioneer  exhausted  his 
ready  cash  in  the  first  payments  on  his  land,  and  his  entire  stock  of  capital 
which  he  took  to  his  new  home  consisted  of  an  axe,  a  gun,  a  few  tools, 
perhaps  a  plough,  some  flour,  and  a  few  head  of  livestock.  With  this  meager 
equipment  he  undertook  a  double-task:  (1)  the  maintenance  of  his  family 
with  the  immediate  necessities  of  life,  or  the  production  of  consumption 
goods,  and  (2)  the  clearing  of  land,  erection  of  buildings,  and  the  building  of 
roads'  or,  in  other  words,  the  creation  of  capital  goods.  It  was  because  the 
greater  part  of  his  time  and  energy  were  devoted  to  the  latter  kind  of  pro¬ 
duction  that  his  standard  of  living  seemed  low. 

The  pioneer  farmer  may  be  compared  to  a  business  corporation  which 
pursues  a  conservative  dividend  policy.  Instead  of  paying  out  all  of  current 
income  to  the  stockholders,  it  puts  a  large  share  back  into  the  business,  thus 

G0  Bell,  in  New  Hampshire  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  VII,  347. 

01  North,  Augusta,  Maine,  189. 

62  Miller  and  Wells,  Ryegate,  Vermont,  94. 

63  American  Husbandry,  I,  109-121,  191-196. 


PIONEERING  IN  THE  EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY  83 

increasing  the  value  of  its  capital.  The  pioneer  was  engaged  in  literally 
‘  ploughing  in  his  profits.”  The  income  which  he  did  not  take  out  of  his 
enterprise  steadily  accrued  and  was  shown  in  the  increased  value  of  his  land. 

The  following  quotation  describes,  perhaps  in  too  optimistic  language  the 
economic  position  of  the  pioneer  farmer:64 

“Amidst  the  hard  living  and  hard  labor,  that  attends  the  forming  a  new  settlement, 
the  settler  has  the  most  flattering  prospects  and  encouragements.  One  hundred  acres 
of  land  in  a  new  town,  does  not  generally  cost  him  more  than  he  can  spare  from  the 
wages  of  one  or  two  years.  Besides  maintaining  himself,  the  profits  of  his  labor  will 
generally  enable  a  young  man,  in  that  period  of  time,  to  procure  himself  such  a  tract 
of  land  When  he  comes  to  apply  his  labor  to  his  own  land,  the  produce  of  it  becomes 
extremely  profitable.  The  first  crop  of  wheat  will  fully  pay  him  for  all  the  expense  he 
has  been  at,  in  clearing  up,  sowing,  and  fencing  his  land;  and  at  the  same  time 
increases  the  value  of  the  land,  eight  or  ten  times  the  original  cost.  In  this  way  every 
day  s  labor  spent  in  clearing  up  his  land,  receives  high  wages  in  the  grain  which  it  pro- 
cures,  and  adds  at  the  same  time  a  quantity  of  improved  land  to  the  farm.  An  acre  of 
land  which  in  its  natural  state,  cost  him  perhaps  the  half  of  one  day’s  labor,  is  thus  in 
one  year  made  of  that  value,  that  it  will  afterwards  annually  produce  him  from  fifteen 
to  twenty  five  bushels  of  wheat ;  or  other  kinds  of  produce,  of  equal  value.  In  this  way 
the  profits  attending  labor  on  a  new  settlement,  are  the  greatest  that  ever  can  take  place  in 
agriculture ;  the  laborer  constantly  receiving  double  wages.  He  receives  high  wages  in 
the  produce  of  his  corn  or  wheat;  and  he  receives  much  higher  wages  of  another  kind, 
in  the  annual  addition  of  a  new  tract  of  cultivated  land  to  his  farm.  This  double  kind  of 
wages,  nature  with  great  benevolence  and  design,  has  assigned  to  the  man  of  industry, 
when  he  is  first  making  a  settlement  in  the  uncultivated  parts  of  America:  And  in 
two  or  three  years,  be  acquires  a  very  comfortable  and  independent  subsistence  for  a 
family,  derived  from  no  other  source  but  the  earth,  and  his  own  industry.” 

64  Williams,  History  of  Vermont,  II,  353. 


Chapter  VII. — Farming  in  the  Older  Settlements. 

Crops  and  Tillage. 

The  farming  of  the  older  settlements  in  the  eighteenth  century  continued 
to  be  a  mixed  husbandry  combining  the  cultivation  of  small  areas  of  cereals 
with  the  raising  of  livestock.  The  broad  lines  of  distinction  between  New 
England  and  the  Middle  Colonies  which  had  been  laid  down  in  the  seven¬ 
teenth  century  were  further  emphasized  by  the  eighteenth.  .  The  grazing 
industry  was  given  more  attention  in  New  England,  whereas  m  the  Middle 
Colonies,  and  particularly  in  Pennsylvania  and  New  Jersey,  wheat-growing 
was  of  increasing  importance.  As  far  as  its  technical  condition  was  concerned, 
agriculture  was  almost  everywhere  in  a  bad  state.  Farming  appeared  at  its 
worst  on  the  frontier,  where  the  scarcity  of  labor  and  capital  favored  preda¬ 
tory  methods,  and  at  its  best  in  the  neighborhood  of  the  commercial  towns, 
where  ready  markets  stimulated  intensive  use  of  the  soil.  The  typical  farming 
of  the  eighteenth  century,  the  subject  of  discussion  in  this  and  following 
chapters,  was  to  be  found  between  these  extremes.  The  majority  of  farmers 
were  not  pioneers  of  the  frontier  nor  market  gardeners.  The  typical  agri 
culture  of  the  period  was  conducted  not  on  new  but  on  old  soil,  on  farms 
that  had  been  worn  out  by  generations  of  bad  tillage,  and  it  was  conducted 
in  regions  away  from  tidewater,  where  markets  were  relatively  inaccessible. 

In  general,  judged  by  the  best  standards  of  their  own  time,  the  business 
of  the  inland  farmers  at  the  end  of  the  eighteenth  century  was  ineffectively 
and  even  carelessly  managed.  In  only  a  few  particulars  had  noticeable  im¬ 
provement  been  made  over  the  primitive  methods  employed  by  the  earliest 
settlers.  As  soon  as  the  pioneer  stage  had  passed  in  a  particular  locality  the 
colonists  had  settled  down  in  a  routine  husbandry  similar  to  the  practices  of 
English  farmers  of  the  seventeenth  century,  but  in  some  ways  showing 
retrogression.  In  the  century  and  a  half  intervening  between  the  settlement 
of  New  England  and  the  opening  of  the  nineteenth  century,  improvements 
of  far-reaching  significance  had  been  introduced  in  English  agriculture,  through 
the  work  of  Tull,  BakewelJ,  Townshend,  Coke,  and  Arthur  Young.  The 
knowledge  of  these  changes  had  spread  quickly  to  this  side  of  the  Atlantic, 
and  yet  the  bulk  of  the  farmers  had  shown  no  disposition  to  adopt  the  new 
methods.  On  their  poorly  cultivated  fields  little  fertilizer  of  any  sort  was 
used,  their  implements  were  rough  and  clumsy,  livestock  was  neglected,  and 
the  same  grains  and  vegetables  were  raised  year  after  year  with  little  attempt 
at  a  rotation  of  crops,  until  the  land  was  exhausted. 

CONTEMPORARY  CRITICISM. 

The  apparent  lack  of  intelligence  and  of  a  progressive  spirit  among  north¬ 
ern  farmers  drew  severe  comment  from  both  native  and  foreign  observers. 


84 


FARMING  IN  THE  OLDER  SETTLEMENTS 


85 


General  Warren  of  Massachusetts,  writing  in  the  American  Museum  1  in 
1786,  drew  a  sharp  contrast  between  the  methods  prevailing  at  home  and  in 
England.  He  says : 

“A  man  in  England  that  farms  150  acres,  would  think  a  stock  of  £500  sterling  neces¬ 
sary  ;  three  teams  would  be  employed ;  four  or  five  ploughs ;  barrows,  wagons,  carts,  &c. 
in  proportion;  70  or  80  acres  tilled;  8  or  10  labourers  at  work;  800  or  1000  loads  of 
manure  annually  collected ;  and  perhaps  three  times  more  cattle,  sheep,  and  hogs  kept, 
than  are  kept  here  on  a  farm  that  is  naturally  as  good.  A  man  in  America  that  farms 
150  acres,  would  think  a  stock  of  £100  sufficient.  One  miserable  team;  a  paltry  plough, 
and  everything  in  the  same  proportion ;  three  acres  of  Indian  corn,  which  require  all 
the  manure  he  has;  as  many  acres  of  half-starved  English  grain  from  a  half-cultivated 
soil,  with  a  spot  of  potatoes,  and  a  small  yard  of  turneps,  complete  the  round  of  his 
tillage,  and  the  whole  is  conducted,  perhaps,  by  a  man  and  a  boy,  and  performed  in  half 
their  time;  no  manure  but  the  dung  from  the  barn,  which,  if  the  heaps  are  not  exposed 
to  be  washed  away  by  the  winter  rains,  may  amount  to  15  or  20  loads;  and  if  they  are 
so  exposed  to  much  less,  without  any  regret  to  the  farmer.  All  the  rest  of  the  farm  is 
allotted  for  feeding  a  small  stock.  A  large  space  must  be  mowed  for  a  little  hay  for 
winter;  and  a  large  range  for  a  little  feed  in  summer.  Pastures  are  never  manured, 
and  mowing  lands  seldom.” 

Tench  Coxe  2  observed  a  number  of  defects  in  the  agriculture  of  the  Middle 
Atlantic  States,  including 

“  innumerable  instances  of  impoverished  lands ;  precious  bodies  of  meadow  lands,  in 
the  old  settlements  of  some  of  the  states,  which  remain  in  a  state  of  nature;  a  frequent 
inattention  to  the  making  or  preserving  of  manure;  as  frequent  inattention  to  the  con¬ 
dition  of  the  seed  grain  evidenced  by  the  growth  of  inferiour  grain  in  fields  of  wheat, 
and  by  the  complexion  of  the  flour  in  some  quarters ;  the  bad  condition  of  barns,  stables, 
and  fences,  and  in  some  places  the  total  want  of  the  former;  the  deficiency  of  spring- 
houses  or  other  cool  dairies,  in  extensive  tracts  of  country ;  the  want  of  a  trifling  stock 
of  bees ;  the  frequent  want  of  orchards,  and  the  neglect  of  those  which  have  been  planted 
by  preceding  occupants ;  the  neglect  of  the  sugar-tree ;  the  neglect  of  fallen  timber  and 
fuel,  accompanied  with  the  extravagant  felling  of  timber  trees  for  fuel;  the  neglect  of 
household  manufactures  in  many  families;  the  neglect  of  making  pot-ash;  the  non-use 
of  oxen;  .  .  .  .”  [He  concluded  that]  “farming,  in  the  grain  states,  their  great  best 
business,  the  employment  most  precious  in  free  governments,  is  too  generally  speaking, 
the  least  understood,  or  the  least  economically  and  attentively  pursued,  of  any  of  the 
occupations  which  engage  the  citizens  of  the  United  States.” 

Although  usually  a  staunch  supporter  of  all  New  England  institutions, 
Dwight 3  was  forced  to  admit  that 

“  the  husbandry  of  New  England  is  far  inferior  to  that  of  Great  Britain .  The 

principal  defects  in  our  husbandry,  so  far  as  I  am  able  to  judge,  are  a  deficiency  in  the 
quantity  of  labour,  necessary  to  prepare  the  ground  for  seed;  insufficient  manuring;  the 
want  of  a  good  rotation  of  crops ;  and  slovenliness  in  cleaning  the  ground.  The  soil  is 
not  sufficiently  pulverized;  nor  sufficiently  manured.  We  are  generally  ignorant  of  what 
crops  will  best  succeed  each  other;  and  our  fields  are  covered  with  a  rank  growth  of 
weeds.” 

CROP  MANAGEMENT. 

Let  us  take  up  the  principal  criticisms  in  more  detail  as  far  as  they  relate 
to  field  crops,  reserving  others  for  later  chapters.  First,  as  regards  crop 
management.  The  general  practice  was  to  sow  grain  crops  successively  on 
the  same  land  without  manuring  until  it  was  exhausted  and  then  to  leave  it 


1  II,  No.  IV  (1787),  p.  347. 

2  View  of  the  United  States  (1794),  358. 

3  Travels,  I  (1821  ed.),  108,  109. 


86 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


fallow,  i.  e.,  to  grow  up  to  weeds  and  bushes  for  a  number  of  years  until 
it  was  thought  to  have  rested  sufficiently  to  produce  more  grain.  Kalm  4 
nQted  (1748)  that  the  land  near  Germantown,  being  tilled  for  several  years 
successively  without  being  manured,  eventually  declined  in  fertility. 

“  Its  possessor  therefore  leaves  it  fallow,  and  proceeds  to  another  part  of  his  ground, 
which  he  treats  in  the  same  manner.  Thus  he  goes  on  till  he  has  changed  a  great  part  of 
his  possessions  into  corn-fields,  and  by  that  means  deprives  the  ground  of  its  fertility. 
He  then  returns  to  the  first  field,  which  now  is  pretty  well  recovered ;  this  he  again  tills 
as  long  as  it  will  afford  him  a  good  crop,  but  when  its  fertility  is  exhausted,  he  leaves 
it  fallow  again,  and  proceeds  to  the  rest  as  before.” 

Fallowing  of  this  sort  was  observed  by  the  author  of  American  Husbandry 
wherever  he  traveled  in  the  northern  colonies.  Of  the  cropping  system  in 
New  York  he  remarked: 5 

“  The  general  system  is  to  crop  their  fields  with  corn,  till  they  are  absolutely  ex¬ 
hausted  ;  then  they  leave  them,  what  they  call  fallow,  that  is,  to  run  to  weeds  for  several 
years,  till  they  think  the  soil  has  recovered  somewhat  of  its  fertility,  when  they  begin 
again  with  corn,  in  succession,  as  long  as  it  will  bear  any,  leaving  it  afterwards  to  a 
fallow  of  weeds.  If  no  spontaneous  growth  came,  but  such  as  cattle  would  freely  eat, 
the  evil  would  not  be  great,  because  then  the  land  would  not  have  more  to  support 
than  it  would  gain  by  the  dung,  &c.  of  the  stock  supported.  But  the  contrary  is  the 
case :  an  infinite  quantity  of  rubbish  comes  which  no  beast  will  touch,  this  seeds  the  land 
in  so  constant  of  succession,  that  the  soil  is  never  without  a  large  crop  on  it.  The 
extent  to  which  this  practice  is  carried  would  astonish  any  person  used  to  better  hus¬ 
bandry  :  it  is  owing  to  the  plenty  of  land ;  the  farmers,  instead  of  keeping  all  their 
grounds  in  good  order,  and  a  due  succession  of  valuable  crops,  depend  on  new  land  for 
every  thing,  and  are  regardless  of  such  management  as  would  make  their  old  fields 
equal  the  value  of  the  new  ones.” 

There  was  no  regularly  observed  succession  of  grain  crops.  Wheat,  maize, 
rye,  and  the  principal  cereals  were  alternated  on  the  larger  fields,  sharing 
the  land  occasionally  with  small  patches  of  oats,  barley,  and  flax.  The  be¬ 
ginning  of  a  modern  system  of  crop  rotation  had  appeared  as  early  as  the 
Revolution.  The  period  of  fallowing,  which  had  ranged  from  7  to  15  years, 
was  shortened  to  1  or  2  years.  In  Massachusetts  the  land  was  usually  broken 
up  after  being  in  grass  3  or  4  years,  and  then  cropped  for  3  years.6  In 
preparation  for  some  crops,  flax,  hemp,  and  wheat,  a  summer  fallow  was 
not  uncommon.  A  few  experiments  were  made  with  the  introduction  of 
new  crops  in  the  rotation,  potatoes  and  clover.  On  a  large  farm  on  the  Hud¬ 
son  River  in  1775  a  6-year  rotation  was  reported  as  follows:  (1)  potatoes, 
(2)  wheat,  (3)  potatoes,  (4)  wheat,  (5)  barley,  (6)  peas  and  clover.  A 
most  important  change  which  began  after  the  Revolution  was  the  introduc¬ 
tion  of  the  practice  of  sowing  the  fields  in  the  years  when  they  were  to  be 
pastured  with  some  kind  of  grass  seed,  often  clover. 

Schoepf  7  described  the  cropping  system  near  Philadelphia  as  follows : 

“  What  with  the  quantity  of  land  many  farmers  own,  they  cannot  work  the  whole  of 
it  properly,  and  therefore  many  acres  lie  fallow  5-6-7  years  together.  The  usual  practice 
is  to  plant  maize  the  first  year ;  the  second  year  wheat  is  sown  along  with  English  grass- 
seeds,  and  after  the  wheat  is  off,  the  field  is  pastured  for  four  or  five  years.  At  other 
times  they  sow  buckwheat  (i  bus.  to  the  acre)  after  wheat,  or  it  may  be  turnips.” 


4  Travels,  I,  185. 

5 1,  126;  see  also  I,  53,  17U 

6  Massachusetts  Agricultural  Repository,  I,  II  (1807),  p.  28. 

7  Travels  (1783-84),  I,  130. 


FARMING  IN  THE  OLDER  SETTLEMENTS 


87 


Cooper  8  descril>ed  a  5-year  rotation  in  use  in  Lancaster  County,  Pennsyl¬ 
vania,  in  1794  in  which  clover  occupied  2  years. 

The  tillage  of  American  fields  was  an  especial  object  of  the  scorn  of 
English  observers.9  The  author  of  American  Husbandry  wrote  of  New 
England : 

“  Worse  ploughing  is  nowhere  to  be  seen . Thus,  in  most  parts  of  the  province, 

is  found  shallow  and  unlevel  furrows,  which  rather  scratch  than  turn  the  land ;  and  of 
this  bad  tillage  the  farmers  are  very  sparing  rarely  giving  two  ploughings  if  they  think 
the  crop  will  do  with  one ;  the  consequence  of  which  is  their  products  being  seldom  near 
so  great  as  they  would  be  under  a  different  management/’ 

Eliot  had  been  convinced  of  the  value  of  deeper  ploughing  and  had 
attempted  to  popularize  his  discoveries,  but  for  the  mass  of  farmers  furrows 
were  probably  not  more  than  4  or  6  inches  deep.10  The  preparation  of 
ground  for  the  various  crops  is  described  in  the  consideration  of  those  crops. 

FERTILIZERS  AND  SOIL  AMENDMENTS. 

The  failure  of  the  colonial  farmers  to  rotate  crops  was  one  reason  for  the 
rapid  exhaustion  of  their  lands.  Another  cause  was  their  neglect  to  replace 
organic  material,  to  keep  up  the  humus  content  of  the  soil.  The  animal 
manure  which  in  their  mixed  husbandry  was  always  available  was  uniformly 
neglected.* 11  If  used  at  all  it  was  applied  sparingly  to  only  a  few  crops,  chiefly 
to  maize  and  potatoes.  In  explaining  the  neglect  of  manuring,  we  must  keep 
in  mind  that  south  of  New  York  most  of  the  livestock  ran  at  large  all  the 
year  through,  and  even  in  New  England  the  period  of  pasturage  extended 
over  9  or  10  months  of  the  year.12  Consequently  the  amount  of  barnyard 
and  stable  manure  which  could  be  collected  was  small  in  proportion  to  the 
number  of  stock  kept.  Nevertheless,  the  failure  to  utilize  the  available  supply 
astonished  contemporary  observers.  Harriot  relates 13  that  on  the  farm 
which  he  purchased  on  Long  Island  there  were  “  some  hundred  loads  of 
rich  manure  which  had  been  collecting  for  several  years,  to  the  great  damage 
of  the  buildings.”  This  accumulation  was  looked  upon  by  his  neighbors 
as  an  encumbrance  merely,  and  the  former  owner  advised  him  to  move  his 
barn,  as  this  would  be  an  easier  way  out  of  the  difficulty  than  moving  the 
manure.  A  similar  state  of  affairs  was  described  by  La  Rochefoucauld  14 
in  Lebanon,  Connecticut. 

Besides  barnyard  manures,  organic  materials  in  the  form  of  fish  and  rock- 
weed  were  utilized  by  farmers  in  the  shore  towns.  The  use  of  rockweed  in 
Maine  was  described  by  General  Lincoln  15  as  follows : 

“  This  rockweed  makes  a  most  excellent  manure,  is  well  calculated  to  bury  under  the 
furrow,  or  to  spread,  in  the  month  of  April,  on  our  meadows.  A  dressing  of  about 


8  Information  Respecting  America,  137.  On  the  introduction  of  clover  see  also  Strick¬ 

land,  Observations,  42. 

9  I,  81. 

10  Tilton  in  American  Museum,  V,  376. 

11  American  Husbandry,  I,  143;  Kalm,  Travels,  I,  102;  Scot,  Geographical  Description 

of  Pennsylvania,  23. 

12  See  p.  107. 

13  Struggles  Through  Life,  II,  216. 

14  Travels,  I,  516. 

15  In  Mass.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  1st  series,  IV,  144. 


88 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


ten  loads  upon  an  acre  will  last  for  three  years.  In  that  period  it  comes  again  to  per¬ 
fection  on  the  rock,  so  that  the  returning  wants  of  the  lands  will  find  a  continual  supply, 
from  the  same  source.  After  a  storm,  large  quantities  of  this  manure  will  be  found 
washed  up  to  highwater  mark,  whence  it  is  easily  carted  upon  the  lands.  But  the  most 
usual  mode  of  obtaining  it,  is  by  pulling  or  cutting  it  from  the  rocks,  and  loading  it  into 
carts,  where  that  can  be  done ;  where  it  cannot,  it  may  be  loaded  into  scows.  The  supply 
of  rockweed  is  immense,  for  it  generally  grows,  in  these  counties,  on  all  the  shores 
which  are  washed  by  the  sea . ” 

The  farmers  along  Long  Island  Sound  made  liberal  use  of  whitefish  for 
fertilizer.  In  June  and  July  the  fish  were  taken  in  seines  in  immense  quanti¬ 
ties;  10,000  of  them  to  the  acre  was  considered  a  liberal  application. 
Dwight 16  wrote : 

“  These  fish  are  sometimes  laid  in  furrows,  and  covered  with  the  plough.  Sometimes 
they  are  laid  singly  on  the  hills  of  maize,  and  covered  with  the  hoe.  At  other  times 
they  are  collected  in  heaps,  formed  with  other  materials  into  a  compost;  carted  upon 
the  ground;  and  spread  in  the  same  manner,  as  manure  from  the  stable.  A  single  net 
has  taken  200,000  in  a  day.  They  are  sold  for  a  dollar  a  thousand;  and  are  said  to 
affect  the  soil  advantageously  for  a  considerable  length  of  time.” 

After  1750  calcareous  materials — limestone,  marl,  and  finally  gypsum — 
began  to  come  into  use  as  soil  amendments.  Kalm  17  noted  the  use  of  lime¬ 
stone  near  New  Brunswick,  New  Jersey,  in  1748 : 

“  The  people  however  pretend  that  this  stone  is  a  very  good  manure,  if  it  is  scattered 
upon  the  corn-fields  in  its  rubbish  state,  for  it  is  said  to  stifle  the  weeds :  it  is  therefore 
made  use  of  both  on  the  fields  and  in  gardens.” 

In  Pennsylvania,  in  the  tract  between  the  Susquehanna  and  Schuylkill 
Rivers,  Pownall 18  reported :  “  Every  farmer  has  a  Limekiln  burnt  for  the 
dressing  of  his  Land,  and  they  raise  a  great  deal  of  Wheat.”  Lime-burning 
was  a  by-industry  of  pioneering  on  the  Maine  coast 19  but  the  product  seems 
to  have  been  exported  rather  than  used  by  farmers.  The  marl  deposits  of 
New  Jersey  were  known  but  little  utilized  before  the  end  of  the  eighteenth 
century.20 

A  most  important  innovation  was  the  use  of  calcium  sulphate,  known 
variously  as  gypsum,  plaster  of  Paris,  and  land  plaster.  Credit  for  the  intro¬ 
duction  of  gypsum  from  Europe  has  been  given  to  the  German  immigrants 
to  Pennsylvania,  probably  because  the  new  “  fertilizer  ”  was  used  only  in 
the  neighborhood  of  Philadelphia.21  According  to  Richard  Peters,22  however, 
gypsum  was  brought  to  America  a  few  years  before  the  Revolution  by  a 
Mr.  Barge  of  Philadelphia,  and  was  first  used  by  the  German  farmers  some 
10  or  12  years  thereafter. 

The  “  gentlemen  farmers,”  men  primarily  interested  in  the  professions  and 
in  politics,  such  as  Logan  and  Peters  in  Philadelphia  and  Chancellor  Living¬ 
ston  in  New  York,  who  were  taking  a  keen  interest  in  agricultural  improve¬ 
ment,  experimented  extensively  with  gypsum  and  wrote  enthusiastically  of  its 

16  Travels,  II,  511,  515,  III,  303.  See  also  N.  Y.  Soc.  for  Promotion  of  Useful  Arts, 

Transactions,  I  (2d.  ed.,  1801),  231. 

17  Travels,  I,  231. 

18  Topographical  Description  (1775),  p.  28.  - 

19  Mass.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  1st  series,  IV,  23. 

20  Philadelphia  Agric.  Soc.  Memoirs,  V,  4. 

21  Strickland,  Observations,  44. 

22  Philadelphia  Agric.  Soc.  Memoirs,  I  (1815),  pp.  163,  166. 


FARMING  IN  THE  OLDER  SETTLEMENTS 


89 


merits.-3  In  at  least  two  regions— the  Connecticut  Valley  and  Southeastern 
Pennsylvania  gypsum  was  in  general  use  by  farmers  on  grass  lands  and  on 
grain  crops.  Schoepf 24  wrote  in  1783  : 

“  About  Philadelphia  and  Germantown,  Whitemarsh,  Lancaster,  and  York  the  use  of 
plaister  tor  grass  and  plow-land  has  recently  become  a  favorite  practice,  because  there 
is  less  trouble  involved  than  in  the  collecting,  lading,  hauling,  and  spreading  of  the 
common  dung  of  cattle— trouble  which  the  farmer  here  does  not  willingly  submit  to.” 

In  Pladley,  Massachusetts,  and  in  East  Windsor,  Connecticut,  Dwight 

found  that  the  use  of  gypsum  had  greatly  increased  crop  yields  and  raised 
land  values.25 


INFLUENCE  OF  THE  NEW  YORK  MARKET. 

In  towns  near  New  York  City  the  presence  of  a  ready  market  stimulated 
intensive  cultivation  and  the  use  of  large  quantities  of  a  variety  of  manures. 
Sweepings  from  the  city  streets  were  used  to  produce  large  crops  in  New 
Jersey  towns  and  in  Westchester  County,  as  well  as  on  Western  Long 
Island.26  On  the  sandy  soil  of  the  latter  gypsum  was  a  failure,  but  the  farm¬ 
ers  set  to  work  to  renew  their  depleted  soils  from  a  variety  of  other  sources. 
Dwight  was  greatly  impressed  with  the  energy  which  they  displayed  He 
wrote:27  J 

‘‘Within  this  period  [i.  e.,  1789-1804]  the  inhabitants,  with  a  laudable  spirit  of  enter¬ 
prise,  have  set  themselves  to  collect  manure,  wherever  it  could  be  obtained.  Not  content 
with  what  they  could  make,  and  find,  on  their  own  farms,  and  shores,  they  have  sent 
their  \essels  up  the  Hudson,  and  loaded  them  with  the  residuum  of  potash  manufactories  * 
gleaned  the  streets  of  New- York;  and  have  imported  various  kinds  of  manure  from  New- 
Haven,  New-London,  and  even  from  Hartford.  In  addition  to  all  this,  they  have  swept  the 
bound ;  and  covered  their  fields  with  the  immense  shoals  of  white-fish  with  which  in  the 
beginning  of  summer  its  waters  are  replenished.  No  manure  is  so  cheap  as  this,  where 
the  nsh  abound .’  none  is  so  rich :  and  few  are  so  lasting.” 


THE  GRAIN  CROPS. 


Indian  corn,  whose  importance  in  the  seventeenth  century  we  have  al¬ 
ready  remarked,  was  still  the  predominant  cereal  at  the  end  of  the  eighteenth 
century.  In  New  England  it  was  “the  grand  product  of  the  country  on 
which  the  inhabitants  principally  feed”;28  Dwight  wrote  23  that  “maize  is 
nearly  as  valuable  to  this  country  as  all  other  kinds  of  corn  united,  and 
\ields  a  crop  much  more  certain,  and  much  more  extensively  useful  than  any 

Her .  The  importance  of  Indian  corn  in  relation  to  other  cereals 

in  the  older  communities  of  New  England  is  indicated  by  table  8,  compiled 
from  the  Massachusetts  valuation  returns  of  1801. 


23 


24 

25 

26 

27 

28 
20 


Philadelphia  Agric.  Soc .  Memoirs,  I  (1815),  pp.  166-180;  New  York  Society  for 

1  (,792)’ pp-  34-6;  Lo«an> 

Travels,  I,  196. 

Travels ,  I,  352;  II,  279  (1821  ed.). 

N.  Y.  Soc.  for  Promotion  of  Useful  Arts,  Transactions,  I  (2d.  ed.,  1801),  p  2t8 
Travels,  III,  303  (1821  ed.).  0  ' 

American  Husbandry,  I,  50. 

Travels  (1821  ed.),  II,  73. 


90 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


Table  8. _ Grain  crops  in  six  counties  of  Massachusetts,  1S01. 


Grain. 

Hampshire 

County. 

Berkshire 

County. 

Worcester 

County. 

Middlesex 

County. 

Bushels. 

P.  ct  of 
total. 

Bushels. 

P.  ct.  of 
total. 

Bushels. 

P.  ct.  of 
total. 

Bushels. 

P.  ct.  of 
total. 

All  grains  . 

Indian  corn  .... 

Rye  . 

Barley  . 

Oats  . 

Peas  and  beans. 
Wheat  . 

525  722 
310.787 
120,468 

I,Ol6 

73,043 

2,640 

17,768 

IOO 

59-1 

22.9 

0.2 

13-9 

0.5 

34 

309,356 

156312 

56479 

933 

66,308 

2,962 

26,362 

IOO 

50.5 

18.3 
0.3 

21.4 
1.0 
8.5 

599,799 

386,130 

75,932 

9,053 

105,324 

4,669 

18,691 

IOO 

644 

12.7 

1.5 

17-5 

0.8 

3-i 

376,6l4i 

276,929 

64  943 
13,430 
16,597 
4,2 1 5i 
500 

IOO 
73-6 
17.2 
3-6 
44 
1. 1 

0.1 

Grain. 

Norfolk  County. 

Essex  County. 

Summary. 

Bushels. 

P.  ct.  of 
total. 

Bushels. 

P.  ct.  of 
total'. 

Bushels. 

P.  ct.  of 
total. 

All  grains  .... 
Indian  corn  . . 

Rye  . 

Barley  . 

Oats  . 

Peas  and  beans 
Wheat  . 

140,414 

Il8,02I 

11,178 

8,105 

2  174 
885 
51 

100 

84.I 

8.0 

5-8 

1-5 

0.6 

•  • 

239,3692 

200,6l8 

14,512 

14,634 

7,890 

630^ 

1,085 

IOO 

83.8 

6.1 

6.1 

3-3 

0.3 

0.4 

2,191  275 
1,448,797 
343,512 
47,171 
27L336 

l6,002 

64,457 

IOO 

66.1 

15-7 

2.2 

12.4 

0.7 

2.1 

In  the  Middle  States  Indian  corn  was  an  important  source  of  human  and 
animal  food,  but,  owing  to  the  competition  of  wheat  a  successful  cash  crop, 
it  did  not  occupy  the  predominant  position  which  it  held  in  New  Englan  . 


CULTIVATION  OF  MAIZE  IN  NEW  ENGLAND — VARIETIES. 

The  method  of  cultivation  of  maize  in  New  England  was  described  by 
Dwight31  as  follows: 

Maize  is  planted  in  hills,  from  three  to  four  feet  apart,  in  a  manner  resembling  a 
quincunx.  The  number  of  stalks  in  a  hill  should  be  not  more  than  four  nor  less  than 
three  The  ground  is  afterwards  broken,  sometimes  with  a  harrow,  made  in  the  form 
of  a  triangle,  and  sometimes  with  a  plough;  each  drawn  by  a  single  horse.  In  s.ony 
grounds  a  larger  plough  is  used;  and  is  drawn  by  a  yoke  of  oxen.  The  ground 
then  cleaned  with  the  hoe.  The  process  is  repeated  at  least  three  times,  and  not  un  re- 
quently  four:  at  the  last  of  which  the  earth  is  raised  to  the  height  of  from  four  to  six 
inches,  around  the  corn,  and  is  denominated  a  hill;  whence  every  planting  is  called  a 
hill  of  corn.  The  hill  is  made,  to  give  a  better  opportunity  for  the  roots,  which,  when 
the  stalk  is  grown  to  a  considerable  height,  shoot  from  it  several  inches  above  the 
surface,  to  insert  themselves  in  the  ground  with  more  ease,  and  less  hazard  of  failure. 
These  roots  are  called  braces ;  because  they  appear  to  be  formed  for  the  sole  purpose 
of  supporting  the  stalk.”  _ . 


so  American  Husbandry,  I,  160;  Watson,  Buckingham  and  Solebury  (Penn.)  in  Hist 

Soc.  of  Penn.  Memoirs,  I,  306. 

31  Travels  (1821  ed.),  I,  108.  See  also  Douglass,  British  Settlements,  11,  204. 


FARMING  IN  THE  OLDER  SETTLEMENTS  91 

Much  of  our  information  regarding  Indian  corn  in  New  England  in  this 

period  is  derived  from  Dwight’s  32  careful  observations.  He  catalogued  the 
following  varieties: 


Names. 

Color. 

Varieties. 

Rows  of  kernels. 

Canada  corn  . 

Yellow  . 

two 

1  8 

1  12 

8 

12 

8 

8 

/  8 1  sweet, 

1 1 2/  insipid. 

S  12  upwards,  shaped 

l  like  a  gourd  seed. 

8 

8 

Flint  . 

f  Yellow  I 

<  Rhip  > . 

two  {  small  }  •  •  •  • 
one 

Nantucket  . 

iRed  J 

Yellow  . 

Chicken  . 

Yellow  . 

one 

Sweet . 

White  . 

one 

Long-Island  . 

White  . 

two 

Guinea  . 

White  . . 

one 

Virginia  . 

White  . 

Carolina  . 

White  . 

one 

Missouri  . 

Yellow  . 

one  .... 

- - - J 

"The  earliest,  and  smallest,  of  these  is  the  Chicken  corn;  and  the  next  the  eight 
rowed  Canada.  The  next  after  these  is  the  Sweet.  All  these  may  in  a  favourable  season 
be  planted  so  early  as  to  furnish  seed  for  a  second  crop,  which  will  come  to  perfection 
the  same  season,  at  New-Haven.  The  Chicken  corn  rarely  exceeds  the  height  of  five 
feet;  the  Canada  seven;  and  the  Sweet  eight.  The  Nantucket  differs  little  from  the 
Canada,  except  that  it  is  later.  The  ears  of  the  Chicken  corn  are  scarcely  more  than 
four  inches  in  length;  and  its  produce  is  trifling  in  quantity  and  value.  The  Sweet 

°l  Sh17!1e  edi  C?rnT*  S°  ^a)led’  because,  when  it  is  ripe,  the  kernels  are  remarkably 
shrivelled,  and  the  Long-Island  Sweet,  which  is  large,  and  comparatively  late,  are,  when 
in  the  milk,  the  most  delicious  of  all  culinary  vegetables. 

“The  Flint  corn  grows  to  the  height  of  ten  feet;  and 'is  the  heaviest,  the  most  nutri- 
tious,  and  most  productive  of  all  the  species. 

"The  Carolina,  and  Missouri,  grow  at  New-Haven  to  the  height  of  fifteen  feet;  but 
the  season  is  rarely  long  enough  to  bring  either  of  them  to  perfection.” 


In  a  system  of  agriculture  so  extensive  in  character  the  amount  of  labor 
spent  m  the  tillage  of  maize  seems  extraordinary.  The  explanation  lies  partly 
in  the  fact  that  Dwight  was  undoubtedly  describing  the  practices  of  the  best 
farmers.  Jared  Eliot 33  had  observed  : 


Indian  Corn  seldom  is  tended  as  it  ought  to  be;  if  there  be  any  ploughing  between 

the  Rows  it  is  shallow  just  so  as  to  kill  Weeds,  but  not  so  as  to  make  a  great  Quantity 
ot  soft  mellow  Earth.  J 


The  author  of  American  Husbandry  34  remarked  in  1775  that  although 
ploughing  between  the  furrows  had  become  a  usual  practice  in  some  parts  of 
JNew  England,  cross-ploughing  was  practiced  “  only  by  good  farmers.”  How¬ 
ever,  maize  was  recognized  as  an  exhausting  crop,  and  as  little  or  no  manure 
was  applied  to  the  land,  it  had  become  evident  that  good  tillage  was  essential 
11  any  kind  of  a  crop  was  to  be  obtained. 


32  Travels  (1821  ed.),  II,  311. 

33  Field  Husbandry  (1760),  121. 

34  I,  50. 


92 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 

MAIZE  IN  NEW  SWEDEN. 


Acrelius,  in  his  History  of  New  Sweden, _  gave  an  account  of  maize  which 
indicates  the  general  methods  prevailing  in  the  region  of  Delaware  Bay. 

He  wrote : 35  ^ 

«  Maize  is  planted  at  the  end  of  April  or  the  beginning  of  May.  Four  furrows  are 
plowed  dose  L  one  another,  and  then  five  or  six  steps  from  these  four  other  furrows 
and  so  over  the  whole  field.  The  plowing  is  done  in  the  month  of  March.  For  the 
planting  is  used  a  broad  hoe,  wherewith  the  earth  is  opened  to  the  dePth  «f  three  or  four 
inches  into  which  are  cast  five  grains  of  corn,  which  are  then  covered  with  the  hoe. 
Sometimes  also  they  add  two  Turkish  beans,  which  thrive  very  well  with  the  ™,ze 
and  run  up  its  stalks.  Each  place  thus  planted  is  called  a  hill.  An  equal  distance 
kept  between  each  hill,  so  that  the  rows  may  be  straight  either  lengthwise  or  cmsswise 
As  soon  as  the  young  plant  comes  up  it  is  plowed  over,  and  even  harrow^'  S°  t  at 
mav  be  free  from  weeds.  When  the  plants  are  half  an  ell  36  high,  the  ground  is  hoed 
up  around  them ;  and.  again  when  they  are  two  ells  high  In  the  month i  of  JfPte™  er’ 
when  the  maize  has  obtained  its  greatest  growth,  although  not  ripe,  the  strongest  blades 
are  cut  off  for  fodder.  They  then  plow  between  the  rows  of  corn  sow  wheat  and 
harrow  it  in;  and  this,  in  the  next  year,  gives  a  full  crop.  By  the  end  of  Octobe 
ears  are  ripe,  pulled  off  on  the  field,  and  carried  home.  The  stocks  and  roots  are  to 
up  during  the  winter,  when  the  ground  is  loose,  to  make  the  fields  clean. 

Cultivation  by  ploughing  and  cross-ploughing  was  noted  hy  Strickland  in 

N  g  o  r  k  3  ^ 

Manasseh  Cutler  wrote  in  his  diary  when  near  Philadelphia : 38  “  In  some 
places  I  saw  fields  of  corn,  the  rows  of  which  I  judged  to  be  a  mile  m  length. 
The  people  do  not  hoe  their  corn  at  all,  but  plow  it  both  ways.” 

In  the  Middle  Colonies  other  grains — wheat,  rye,  or  oats— were  often 
sowed  in  the  furrows  between  the  rows  of  corn,  a  practice  which  not  on  v 
interfered  with  tillage,  but  hastened  the  exhaustion  of  the  soil.39  Cornstalks 
were  fed  to  cattle  in  all  regions,  and  in  the  Middle  Colonies  the  blades  were 
utilized  as  well.  The  blades,  as  Acrelius  wrote,  were  picked  off  before  the 
ears  were  ripe  and  the  stalks  piled  in  stacks  and  fed  during  the  winter.40 

WHEAT— SHIFT  FROM  OLD  TO  NEW  SOILS  IN  NEW  ENGLAND. 

Wheat  had  become  during  the  eighteenth  century  more  and  more  a  special 
crop.  In  some  parts  of  New  England  it  had  begun  to  fail  before  1700  and 
from  1700  to  1750  there  was  a  noticeable  shifting  of  production  from  the 
older  towns  to  the  newer  settlements  in  the  north  and  west.  Eliot  in  1747 
remarked  of  Connecticut  that  “  many  are  inclined  to  remove  to  new  places 
that  they  may  raise  wheat,41  and  again,  in  1754?  he  wrote: 42 

“It  is  high  Time  something  were  done;  our  old  Towns  raising  very  little  wheat,  it  is 
purchased  at  the  new  Towns,  and  these  new  Towns  will  be  old  in  Time;  and  then  what 
shall  we  do  unless  some  better  Way  can  be  found  to  manage  our  old  Land . . 

35  In  Pennsylvania  Hist.  Soc.  Memoirs,  XI,  149-  .  , 

36  The  Swedish  ell  (aln)  is  equal  to  nearly  2  English  feet;  but  it  can  scarcely  be  so 

much  as  here  used  by  our  author,  as  is  evident  from  what  he  says  of  the  height  ol 
potatoes  (4  ells)  when  hilled.  He  no  doubt  means  inches.  (Note  by  the  translator.) 

37  Observations,  39. 

39 ^American  Husbandry,  I,  134,  143  5  Acrelius,  in  Hist.  Soc.  Penn.  Memoirs,  XI,  149 i 

Tilton,  in  American  Museum,  V,  376-  ,  _  f1 

40  Kalm,  Travels,  I,  159;  American  Husbandry,  I,  99;  Judd,  Hadley,  356;  Mass.  Society 

for  Promoting  Agriculture,  Papers  (1807),  pp.  17,  18,  19. 

41  Field  Husbandry,  24. 

42  Ibid.,  1 19- 


FARMING  IN  THE  OLDER  SETTLEMENTS 


93 


By  the  end  of  the  century  the  wheat  crop  had  practically  disappeared  from 
eastern  Massachusetts  (see  table  8,  p.  90),  and  wheat  bread  had  become  prac¬ 
tically  unknown  on  farmers’  tables  throughout  most  of  New  England. 
Wheat  was  an  important  crop  only  in  western  Connecticut  and  Massachu¬ 
setts,  and  in  Northern  Vermont.43  Of  the  latter  region  we  read : 14 

In  the  absence  of  a  stable  currency,  the  standard  of  value  for  many  years,  before  and 
after  1800,  was  a  bushel  of  wheat,  the  staple  product  of  the  farms,  for  which  there  was 
a  steady  demand  and  a  more  nearly  average  value,  one  year  into  another,  than  anything 
else.  Taxes  were  paid  in  wheat,  the  minister’s  salary  and  the  school  master’s  wages 
were  computed  in  it,  and  notes  are  extant  to  be  paid  in  wheat,  which  sometimes  amounted 
to  hundreds  of  bushels.  It  is  impossible  to  state,  or  even  to  estimate,  the  amount  of  wheat 
raised  in  Ryegate,  but  it  amounted  to  many  thousands  of  bushels.  On  some  of  the  large 
farms  hundreds  of  bushels  were  raised  annually.” 


SUCCESS  OF  WHEAT  IN  THE  MIDDLE  COLONIES. 

In  the  Middle  Colonies,  on  the  other  hand,  wheat  was  cultivated  with 
continued  success  throughout  the  eighteenth  century.  Acrelius  wrote  of  the 
lower  Delaware  River  region  in  1759: 45  “  Wheat  is  the  land’s  chief  product.” 
Douglass  claimed  in  1749  that  New  Jersey  raised  more  wheat  than  any  of 
the  English  colonies  in  America.40  The  author  of  American  Husbandry 
called  wheat  the  grand  article  ”  of  the  province  of  Pennsylvania  and  con- 
mended  highly  the  quality  of  wheat  exported  from  New  York,  where  it 
grew  particularly  well  on  Long  Island  and  in  the  Mohawk  Valley.47 

As  New  England  grew  more  and  more  regularly  dependent  on  outside 
sources  for  her  wheat-supply,  the  export  trade  from*  Pennsylvania  and  New 
York  increased,  greatly  stimulating  the  growing  of  wheat  as  a  cash  crop  in 
the  latter  region.48 

BLACK  STEM-RUST  IN  NEW  ENGLAND.— LEGISLATION 

AGAINST  BARBERRIES. 

A  part  at  least  of  the  responsibility  for  the  failure  of  the  wheat  crop  in 
New  England  may  be  assigned  to  the  so-called  blast  or  mildew,  a  parasitic 
fungus  growth  now  recognized  as  the  black  stem-rust.  Since  its  first  appear¬ 
ance  about  1660,  it  spread  rapidly,  and  by  the  end  of  the  eighteenth  century 
it  was  generally  prevalent  wherever  wheat  had  been  cultivated  for  a  number 
of  years.  The  cause  of  the  blight  was  uncertain.  Farmers  believed  that 
barberry  bushes  had  some  connection  with  the  “  blasting  ”  of  grain,  since 
they  had  observed  that  the  grain  in  the  neighborhood  of  such  bushes  was 
most  likely  to  be  affected.49  Acting  upon  this  knowledge  they  secured  the 
passage  of  legislation  for  the  destruction  of  barberries.  Connecticut,  the 
first  State  to  act,  passed  a  law  in  1726  50  which,  after  reciting  in  guarded 

43  American  Husbandry,  I,  52;  Dwight,  Travels  (1821  ed.),  I,  376. 

41  Miller  and  Wells,  History  of  Ryegate  (Vermont) ,  97. 

43  Penn.  Hist.  Soc.  Memoirs,  XI,  148. 

46  British  SettlemeJits,  II,  293. 

47  I,  157;  97- 

48  See  pp.  142-144. 

49  Dwight  gives  a  number  of  instances  of  this  kind  which  had  come  to  his  knowledge. 

Travels  (1821  ed.),  I,  381-383. 

50  Conn.  Colony  Public  Records,  VII,  10. 


94 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


language  that  “  the  abounding  of  barberry  bushes  is  thought  to  be  very 
hurtful,”  granted  power  to  the  town  meetings  to  take  steps  to  eradicate  them. 
It  is  not  known  how  many  towns  took  action  under  this  law  or  that  of  1779 
which  amended  it,  but  New  Haven  at  least  did  so,  appropriating  $200.  in  the 
year  1796  for  the  destruction  of  barberry  bushes  within  its  limits  with 
resulting  benefit  to  the  wheat  crop.51 

Meanwhile  Massachusetts  and  Rhode  Island  had  both  enacted  similar 
legislation.  In  the  preamble  to  the  act  of  1754  the  legislators  of  the  former 
colony  made  the  bold  statement  that  “  it  has  been  found  by  experience  that 
the  blasting  of  wheat  and  other  English  grain,  is  often  occasioned  by  bar¬ 
berry  bushes.”  Their  procedure,  however,  against  the  obnoxious  plants  was 
quite  as  timid  as  that  of  Connecticut.  They  did,  it  is  true,  order  52 

“  That  whoever,  whether  community  or  private  person  hath  any  barberry-bushes 
standing  or  growing  in  his  or  their  land  within  any  of  the  towns  in  this  province  he 
or  they  shall  cause  the  same  to  be  extirpated  or  destroyed  on  or  before  the  tenth  day 
of  June  Anno  Domini,  one  thousand  seven  hundred  and  sixty.” 

But  the  law  imposed  no  penalty  for  non-compliance,  providing  merely 
that  if  the  owner  of  land  failed  to  remove  his  barberries  any  person  might 
enter  and  remove  the  bushes,  collecting  from  the  owner  for  his  services.  The 
law  expired  by  limitation  in  1764. 

It  remained  for  Rhode  Island  to  pass  an  act  compelling  barberry  eradica¬ 
tion.  In  1766  this  colony  had  passed  special  legislation  for  the  Town  of 
Middletown,  which  was  so  cumbersome  in  its  machinery  as  to  be  doomed 
to  failure.  In  1772  there  followed  a  much  more  effective  piece  of  legislation, 
which  provided : 53 

“  That  if  any  Freeholder  in  this  Colony  shall  apply  to  any  Person  having  Barberry 
Bushes  growing  in  his  Field  or  Inclosure  to  destroy  them,  and  the  Owner  of  the  Land 
shall  neglect  or  refuse  to  cut  them  annually,  or  otherwise  destroy  them,  he  shall  pay  as 
a  Fine,  the  Sum  of  Ten  Pounds  Lawful  Money . ” 

Although  the  farmers  and  their  representatives  had  become  so  convinced 
of  the  destructive  effects  of  the  barberries  that  they  had  incorporated  their 
views  into  legislation,  the  learned  men  of  the  community  were  skeptical. 
Dwight,  who  gave  much  thought  to  the  causes  of  the  blast,  eventually  re¬ 
jected  the  barberry  theory.  Although  he  recognized  that  barberries  and  rust 
often  were  found  in  the  same  areas,  as  for  instance  in  the  eastern  counties 
of  Massachusetts,  yet  he  also  discovered  other  areas  where  barberries  were 
absent  and  yet  the  grain  was  destroyed.  His  own  explanation  was  that  the 
use  of  barn-yard  manure  forced  the  wheat  too  rapidly  during  the  early  stages 
of  its  growth.54  The  sequel,  of  course,  has  shown  that  the  practical  men 
were  right,  the  theorists  wrong.  Investigations  of  European  botanists,  pub¬ 
lished  in  1870,  show  conclusively  that  the  barberry  acts  as  a  host  to  the 
wheat  parasite  in  certain  stages  of  its  growth.55 

51  Dwight,  Statistical  Account  of  New  Haven,  64. 

52  Ch.  X,  Acts  of  1754,  in  Mass.  Temporary  Acts  and  Laws,  1755,  p.  153. 

53  Rhode  Island  Laws,  August  1 772,  p.  46,  quoted  by  Davis  in  Col.  Soc.  Mass.  Publica¬ 

tions,  XI,  92. 

64  Travels  (1821  ed.),  II,  340-345. 

55  American  Journal  of  Science,  2d  series,  XLIX  (1870),  p.  406.  See  also  Stakman,  in 
U.  S.  Dept.  Agric.,  Yearbook  (1918),  75-100. 


FARMING  IN  THE  OLDER  SETTLEMENTS 


95 


SEED  SELECTION— WINTER  VS.  SPRING  WHEAT. 

The  destruction  of  barberries  was  not  alone  relied  upon  in  combating  the 
rust.  Experiments  were  made  in  seed  selection  with  a  view  to  getting  a 
variety  which  would  mature  quickly.  It  was  remarked  by  Hutchinson  56  in 
1764  that  the  wheat  which  matured  earliest  suffered  least  from  the  blast  and 
on  that  account  spring  wheat  suffered  more  than  grain  sown  in  the  autumn. 
He  mentioned  a  new  variety  of  wheat  recently  introduced  from  Portugal 
as  less  subject  to  the  blast  than  the  varieties  usually  grown.  Jared  Eliot 57 
had  mentioned  somewhat  earlier  “a  sort  of  Summer  Wheat  brought  into 
Lse,  not  subject  to  Blast  as  the  sort  we  had  formerly  among  us.” 

Winter  grain  became,  in  the  latter  half  of  the  eighteenth  century,  more 
generally  sown  than  summer  grain,  not  only  in  New  England  but  in  the 
Middle  Colonies  as  well,58  and  this  was  in  part  at  least  owing  to  the  prev¬ 
alence  of  the  rust.  Shoepf  59  wrote  of  the  farmers  in  Bedford  County, 
Pennsylvania : 

“They  (the  farmers)  must  always  get  their  winter  wheat  into  the  ground  before  the 
end  of  August,  because  otherwise  the  following  year  it  will  not  be  large  and  strong 
enough  to  be  safe  against  the  mildew.” 

The  failure  of  wheat  crops  in  New  England  is  not  to  be  attributed  entirely 
to  the  rust  or  to  the  Hessian  fly,  which  followed.  The  author  of  American 
Husbandry  60  remarked : 

They  say  they  cannot  grow  good  wheat ;  that  they  do  not  grow  good  wheat  I  am 
sensible,  but  I  attribute  it  to  their  throwing  it  into  such  systems  as  this,  1  maize,  2  maize, 
3  wheat,  4  oats,  5  wheat,  &c.  &c.  In  which  case,  the  wheat  may  be  thin,  thrivelled,  and 
husky,  without  its  being  the  fault  of  the  climate;  I  am  of  opinion,  under  such  culture, 
it  would  be  the  same  in  Britain.” 

The  Middle  Colonies  also  suffered  from  both  of  these  pests.  But  with  the 
initial  advantage  of  better  soil,  the  Pennsylvania  and  New  York  farmers 
ga\e  their  wheat  fields  better  tillage  and  developed  crops  which  more  success¬ 
fully  withstood  the  attacks  of  parasites  and  insects. 

THE  HESSIAN  FLY.— ITS  ORIGIN.— EFFECTS  OF  ITS  RAVAGES. 

Another  destructive  enemy  of  the  wheat  crop  was  the  Hessian  fly,  a  pest 
which  first  made  its  appearance  on  Long  Island  during  the  Revolution.  A 
contemporary  writer  claimed  that  it  was  introduced  in  the  beds  of  Hessian 
mercenaries  or  in  the  provender  for  their  horses.61  No  great  injuries  to 
the  wheat  crop  were  reported  until  1785  or  1786,  when  it  spread  into  New 
Jersey.  By  1788  it  had  crossed  the  Delaware  and  caused  great  destruction 
in  the  eastern  counties  of  Pennsylvania.  In  1797  the  fly  was  found  west  of 
the  Allegheny  Mountains.62  By  1800  it  had  spread  throughout  Connecticut 

66  History  of  Massachusetts,  I,  485,  note. 

57  Field  Husbandry,  53. 

58  Acrelius,  in  Penn.  Hist.  Soc.  Memoirs,  XI,  148;  Kalm,  Travels,  I,  166;  American 

Husbandry,  I,  97,  157;  Schoepf,  Travels,  I,  44. 

59  Travels,  I,  224. 

60  I,  77- 

61  Bordley,  Essays  and  Notes,  242. 

62  American  Museum,  I,  531;  IV,  47;  Philadelphia  Agric.  Soc.  Memoirs,  V,  143; 

Letters  of  Phineas  Bond,  in  Am.  Hist.  Asso.  Report  (1897),  p.  456. 


96 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


and  was  steadily  working  its  way  into  the  back  country  of  New  England 
and  New  York.63 

In  some  districts,  notably  on  Long  Island,  the  farmers  gave  way  before 
the  pest,  replacing  wheat  with  rye.  Elsewhere  methods  were  devised  to 
restrict  its  ravages.  It  was  discovered  that  the  first  sharp  frost  killed^  the 
adult  insect  and  consequently  late  sowing  was  practiced.  In  Connecticut, 
by  1811,  the  date  of  planting  had  been  shifted  from  the  third  week  in  August 

to  the  last  week  in  September  or  the  first  of  October.04 

Changes  also  occurred  in  the  varieties  of  wheat  cultivated.  In  Connecticut, 

before  the  fly  appeared,  says  Dwight : 65 

“the  white  bald  wheat  was  almost  exclusively  cultivated.  This  was  much  the  best 
wheat  ever  known  in  New-England.  It  was  less  exposed  to  injuries  from  the  frost,  or 
the  blast,  than  any  other.  It  yielded  more  by  the  acre ;  the  grain  was  heavier ;  the  flour 
was  whiter,  and  better  tasted;  and  the  bread  fresh  and  moist  much  longer.  This  wheat 
was,  more  than  any  other,  the  favorite  food  of  the  fly;  and  has,  therefore,  been  for 
many  years  disused.  The  yellow-bearded  wheat  has  been  substituted  for  it  extensively. 
Several  other  kinds  have  been  also  sown,  with  different  success. 

In  the  Middle  Colonies  spelt  (T.  sativum  var.  spelta ),  a  variety  of  wheat 
raised  by  the  Germans  for  horse-fodder  and  for  bread,  was  found  to  be  more 

resistant  to  the  fly  than  other  varieties.66 

Indirectly  the  Hessian  fly  rendered  good  service  to  wheat  cultivation.  It 
was  discovered  that  the  crops  planted  on  the  well-manured  and  more  thor¬ 
oughly  cultivated  ground  suffered  less.  Increased  attention  was  given  to 
fertilization  and  tillage,  resulting  in  some  instances  in  increased  yields  per 

acre.67 


TILLAGE  OF  WHEAT. 

Wheat  and  other  small  grains  were  often  sown  in  the  furrows  when  Indian 
corn  was  cultivated,  the  land  thus  requiring  no  especial  preparation  for  the 
succeeding  crop,  or,  after  the  Indian  corn  had  been  harvested,  the  stubble 
was  ploughed  under  and  the  seed  sown  and  harrowed  in.  If  wheat  was  to 
be  sown  on  grass  land,  a  summer  fallow  often  intervened.  The  land  was 
broken  up  in  the  fall,  or  in  the  early  spring,  and  ploughed  once  or  twice 
before  fall  when  the  grain  was  sown  and  harrowed  in.  In  the  autumn  the 
cattle  were  often  pastured  on  the  sprouting  grain.68 

RYE. 

Rye  was  a  widely  distributed  crop.  It  was  grown  on  practically  every  farm, 
being  confined  principally  to  sandy  and  gravelly  soils.  In  New  England,  on 
account  of  the  decline  of  wheat-growing,  rye  flour  and  Indian  meal  made 
the  standard  “rye  and  Injun  ”  bread  of  the  farm  families.  The  thrifty 
Germans  of  Pennsylvania,  although  growing  large  crops  of  wheat  for  market, 

03  Dwight,  Travels  (1821  ed.),  I,  495  Hfi  300-302. 

64  Dwight,  Statistical  Account  of  New  Haven,  22. 

65  Cltm 

66  N.  Y.  Soc.  for  Promotion  of  Useful  x\rts,  Transactions,  IV,  pt.  II  (1819),  p.  126. 

67  Ibid.,  1/ pt.  I,  57;  Bordley,  Notes  and  Essays,  30,  243. 

68  Acrelius,  in  Penn.  Hist.  Soc.  Memoirs,  XI,  148;  Tilton,  in  American  Museum,  V,  370; 

Schoepf,  Travels,  I,  130. 


FARMING  IN  THE  OLDER  SETTLEMENTS 


97 


raised  rye  for  their  bread-flour.69  Rye,  as  well  as  wheat  and  corn,  was  in 
demand  at  local  distilleries  for  the  production  of  whisky  and  gin.  Rye  seems 
to  have  been  chiefly  used  for  distillation.  Strickland  wrote : 70 

“  All  the  back  country  of  America  is  very  favourable  to  the  growth  of  rye ;  crops, 
producing  from  twenty  to  thirty  bushels,  are  commonly  met  with ;  this  grain  is  entirely 
consumed  in  the  distillation  of  whisky,  chiefly  for  the  consumption  of  the  Irish  frontier- 
men,  except  among  the  Germans  in  Pennsylvania,  who  use  it  for  bread.” 

Rye  straw,  as  well  as  that  of  barley  and  oats,  was  used  to  supplement  hay 
as  winter  fodder  for  livestock. 

MINOR  GRAINS— BARLEY,  OATS,  BUCKWHEAT. 

The  author  of  American  Husbandry  wrote : 71 

“  Barley  and  oats  are  very  poor  crops,  yet  do  they  cultivate  both  in  all  parts  of  New 
England :  the  crops  are  such  as  an  English  farmer,  used  to  the  husbandry  of  the  eastern 
parts  of  the  kingdom,  would  think  not  worth  standing ;  this  I  attribute  entirely  to  climate, 
for  they  have  land  equal  to  the  greatest  productions  of  those  plants.” 

The  barley  of  New  England,  although  regarded  there  as  “  a  poor  crop/’ 
was  highly  esteemed  in  the  Middle  States  and  was  exported  to  New  York 
and  Philadelphia,  where  it  was  brewed  for  beer.72  Oats,  grown  chiefly  for 
feeding,  horses,  were  also  bad ;  “  lean,  chaffy,  and  of  a  dark  Colour.”  73 
Strickland  wrote : 74 

“  I  never  saw  any  oats  that  would  be  marketable  in  England,  except  some  in  the 
German  tract  in  Pennsylvania,  and  they  would  admit  of  comparison  with  such  only 
as  we  should  esteem  very  moderate.” 

Only  where  Scotch  settlers  were  numerous  were  oats  grown  for  the  pro¬ 
duction  of  oatmeal.75  Buckwheat  was  generally  cultivated  in  New  York  and 
New  Jersey,  but  was  not  much  regarded  in  New  England  or  in  Pennsylvania. 
It  was  often  sown  as  a  catch  crop  on  land  from  which  winter  grain  had  been 
harvested.  The  land  was  ploughed  and  the  seed  harrowed  in.  Buckwheat  was 
fed  to  horses,  and  was  also  used  for  fattening  poultry  and  swine.  In  some 
sections  as  in  New  Jersey  buckwheat  cakes  were  already  a  familiar  dish  on 
the  farmer’s  table.76  In  Pennsylvania  some  farmers  had  begun  at  the  end 
of  the  century  to  plough  under  buckwheat  as  a  green  manure.77 

POTATOES. 

The  introduction  in  the  last  half  of  the  eighteenth  century  of  the  general 
cultivation  of  potatoes  marked  an  important  step  in  American  agricultural 
history.  In  New  England  the  first  cultivators  of  potatoes  were  the  Scotch- 

69  Rush  in  Penn.  German  Soc.  Proceedings  and  Addresses,  XIX  (1910),  62. 

70  Observations  (1794),  47;  see  also  Cooper,  Information  Respecting  America,  122; 

Temple  and  Sheldon,  Northdeld,  Massachusetts,  342;  Watson,  Essex  County,  New 
York,  435 ;  Pennsylvania  Archives,  1st  series,  V,  229. 

71 1,  53. 

72  Belknap,  New  Hampshire,  III,  142. 

73  Douglass,  British  Settlements,  II,  207. 

74  Observations  (1794),  48. 

75  Miller  and  Wells,  Ryegate,  Vermont,  190. 

76  American  Husbandry,  I,  100,  135,  165;  Acrelius,  in  Penn.  Hist.  Soc.  Memoirs,  XI,  149; 

Cooper,  Information  Respecting  America,  138;  Schoepf,  Travels,  I,  194. 

77  Bordley,  Essays  and  Notes,  52. 

8 


98 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


Irish  immigrants,  who  came  in  1718-' 8  The  natives  took  up  the  new  crop 
reluctantly. 

“  They  [potatoes]  were  kept  as  a  rarity,  to  eat  with  roast  meat.  They  were  at  first 
planted  in  beds,  as  beets  and  carrots.  Three  bushels  of  them  were  considered  a  large 
crop  for  one  farmer’s  family.”  79 

After  the  Revolution  potatoes  came  into  general  use  as  food  in  New  Eng¬ 
land,  and  perhaps  somewhat  later  in  New  York  and  Pennsylvania.  The 
peculiar  adaptation  of  Maine  soil  and  climate  for  potatoes  was  discovered 
before  the  end  of  the  century.80  The  method  of  cultivating  potatoes  on  the 
Delaware  was  described  by  Acrelius  81  as  follows: 

“  Potatoes  are  quite  common,  of  two  kinds — the  Irish  and  the  Maryland.  The  Irish 
are  also  of  two  kinds :  the  first  round,  knotty,  whitish,  mealy,  somewhat  porous.  They 
are  planted  thus;  upon  a  smooth  and  hard  ground  a  bed  of  dung  is  formed.  Portions 
of  this  are  thrown  upon  the  potatoes,  which  are  then  covered  with  ground  of  even  the 
poorest  kind.  When  the  stalks  have  come  up  about  four  ells  high,  they  are  again  hilled 
up  with  the  same  kind  of  earth,  in  order  to  strengthen  the  roots,  which  are  thus  con¬ 
siderably  increased  in  number.  The  other  kind  is  long,  branching,  thick,  reddish,  juicy, 
and  more  porous.  For  these  a  long  ditch,  the  depth  of  a  spade,  is  dug;  the  bottom  of 
which  is  covered  with  manure,  set  with  pieces  of  potatoes,  and  covered  over  with  earth. 
When  the  stalks  come  up,  they  are  treated  as  those  above  mentioned.” 

In  New  England  potatoes  were  planted  in  much  the  same  manner  as 
Indian  corn.82 

“  The  ground  being  broken  up,  but  not  harrowed,  a  large  hole  was  made  by  cutting 
out  a  piece  of  the  sod  the  whole  depth  of  the  ploughing.  Into  the  bottom  of  this  hole 
was  thrown  a  shovelful  of  dung,  if  so  much  could  be  spared,  then  a  scanty  portion  of 
seed,  which  lay  far  below  the  surface  of  the  ground,  over  which  was  made  an  enormous 
hill  which  must  receive  considerable  addition  at  hoeing.  In  this  way,  with  double  the 
necessary  labor,  something  like  half  a  crop  was  obtained.” 


FLAX. 

The  cultivation  of  small  patches  of  flax  had  become  increasingly  general 
during  the  eighteenth  century.  In  part  this  was  owing  to  the  increased  pro¬ 
duction  of  linen  textiles  in  the  farm  homes,  a  branch  of  industry  which  was 
greatly  stimulated  by  the  immigration  of  the  Scotch-Irish.  But  flax  was 
grown  not  only  for  the  fiber  but  for  the  seed,  one  of  the  few  products  which 
could  be  marketed.  A  part  of  the  seed  was  crushed  in  local  oil-mills,  and 
considerable  quantities  were  exported  to  Europe.83  In  Fairfield  County,  Con¬ 
necticut,  the  soil  proved  well  adapted  to  flax,  and  it  became  a  special  crop  in 
that  region.  From  a  single  township  about  20,000  pounds  of  seed  were 
annually  exported.84 

TOBACCO. 

Farmers  addicted  to  the  use  of  tobacco  continued  to  raise  small  quantities 
in  their  gardens  for  their  own  use.  The  consumption  and  cultivation  of 

78  Judd,  Hadley,  358. 

79  Felt,  Ipswich,  40;  see  also  Lyman,  Easthampton,  Massachusetts,  67;  Temple,  Whately, 

Massachusetts,  76. 

80  Sewall,  in  Mass.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  1st  series,  III,  9;  Ripley,  in  the  same,  1st 

series,  IX,  141 ;  Allen,  Maine  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  1st  series,  VII,  272. 

81  In  Penn.  Hist.  Soc.  Memoirs,  XI,  150. 

82  Wheeler,  Brunswick,  Maine,  220;  see  also  Mass.  Soc.  for  Promoting  Agric.  Papers 

(1807),  p.  21. 

83  See  p.  134. 

84  Dwight,  Travels  (1821  ed.),  Ill,  519. 


FARMING  IN  THE  OLDER  SETTLEMENTS 


99 


tobacco  increased  after  the  Revolution  and  in  a  few  localities,  as  in  the  towns 
in  the  Connecticut  Valley,  occasional  exports  of  tobacco  gave  promise  of  its 
future  commercial  importance.85 


PEAS. 

The  cultivation  of  field  peas  as  a  forage  crop  had  declined,  owing  to  the 
ravages  of  the  pea-bug  in  New  England,  Pennsylvania,  and  New  Jersey, 
but  peas  were  still  successfully  grown  in  northern  New  York.86 

GARDEN  VEGETABLES. 

The  eighteenth  century  farmers  paid  little  attention  to  gardens.  They  dug 
up  and  fenced  a  small  piece  of  ground  near  their  houses  and  then  left  its  care 
to  the  women  of  the  household,  already  overburdened  with  the  household 
industries.  The  Germans  of  Pennsylvania  gave  more  attention  to  gardens, 
but,  in  general,  only  a  few  varieties  of  vegetables  appeared  on  the  farmers’ 
tables.  Turnips,  onions,  and  cabbages  were  grown  most  generally  and  were 
occasionally  fed  to  animals.  Onions  in  a  few  localities,  such  as  Wethersfield, 
Connecticut,  and  Barnstable,  Massachusetts,  were  an  important  cash  crop.87 
In  the  neighborhood  of  the  coast  towns  a  greater  variety  of  vegetables  was 
grown  for  market.88 

FRUIT. 

In  New  England  apples  were  by  far  the  most  abundant  fruit.  Dwight 89 
catalogued  the  following  varieties : 

“  Pome  royal,  Golden  Apple,  Jennetin,  Newtown  pippin,  Fall  pippin,  October  pippin, 
Golden  pippin,  Bellet  bonne,  Green  Russet,  Yellow  Russet,  Red  Russet,  Gilliflower, 
Plum  Apple,  Early  Seek  no  further,  Late  Seek  no  further,  Spitzenberg,  Pearmain, 
Holden  Sweeting,  Green  Sweeting,  Greening.” 

Apples  were  utilized  chiefly  for  making  cider,  which  had  become  “  the 

common  drink  of  all  its  inhabitants,  rich  and  poor  alike . In  the 

cellars  of  the  well-to-do  houses  a  barrel  of  cider  was  always  on  tap,  and 
pitchers  of  it  were  brought  up  at  every  meal  and  in  the  morning  and  eve¬ 
ning.”  90  Even  children  were  given  diluted  cider  when  milk  was  scarce.91 
Besides  the  domestic  consumption,  which  was  truly  prodigious,  there  was  an 
export  market  for  cider  and  cider  brandy,  as  well  as  for  apples,  in  the  West 
Indies.  Under  such  conditions  it  is  not  surprising  to  find  individual  farmers 
making  25,  50,  or  more  barrels  of  cider  each  year.92  The  Massachusetts 
valuation  returns  for  1767  give  33,436  barrels  as  the  quantity  of  cider  pro¬ 
duced  in  Middlesex  County  in  that  year,  amounting  to  seven  barrels  for  each 

85  Lees,  Journal  (1768),  p.  10;  Trumbull,  Hartford  County,  Connecticut,  I,  215;  Judd, 

Hadley,  375. 

86  Kalm,  Travels,  I,  173;  American  Husbandry,  I,  100;  Judd,  Hadley,  355. 

87  Dwight,  Travels  (1821  ed.),  226;  Kendall,  Travels,  II,  129. 

88  Rush,  in  Penn.  German  Society  Proceedings  and  Addresses,  XIX,  65;  Dwight,  Travels 
(1821  ed.),  II,  498;  Deane,  New  England  Farmer,  2d  ed.,  40,  352. 

89  Travels,  I,  44,  45. 

90  Adams,  Three  Episodes  in  Massachusetts  History,  II,  68 6. 

91  Earle,  Home  Life  in  Colonial  Days,  148,  161. 

92  Diaries  of  Rev.  Timothy  Walker,  in  N.  H.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  IX,  166;  American 

Husbandry,  I,  56. 


100 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


family  or  1.14  barrels  per  capita.  Not  all  the  apples  were  crushed  for  cider. 
Besides  those  consumed  in  their  natural  state,  large  quantities  were  sliced  and 
dried  for  winter  use.  In  especially  good  years  there  still  remained  a  surplus 
which  was  fed  to  cattle  and  swine.  Peaches  were  grown  more  successfully 
in  the  region  around  New  York  and  in  New  Jersey  and  Pennsylvania  than 
farther  to  the  northward.  Every  farmer  had  peaches  and  apples  in  abun¬ 
dance,  so  that  after  the  demands  of  his  family  had  been  met  and  passers-by 
had  helped  themselves  liberally  and  the  swine  had  eaten  what  they  could, 
there  was  still  a  remainder  which  rotted  on  the  ground.  Orchard  fruit,  as 
well  as  melons,  constituted  an  important  part  of  the  summer  diet  of  the 
people  of  the  Middle  Colonies.  Peaches  were  sliced  and  dried  in  Pennsyl¬ 
vania,  as  apples  were  in  New  England  and  were  also  made  into  peach 
brandy.03 

In  general,  there  was  little  systematic  cultivation  of  fruit  in  this  country 
before  the  year  1800.  Once  the  trees  were  set  out  little  attention  was  paid 
to  orchards.  As  a  result  they  became  infested  with  worms  and  throughout 
New  England  there  was  complaint  that  the  old  orchards  were  dying  out. 
“  Choice  varieties  of  apples,  pears,  peaches  and  cherries  were  known  only 
to  a  few  careful  cultivators,  and  the  number  of  varieties  of  these  was  quite 
limited  as  compared  with  the  present  day.”  94  Only  a  few  leaders  in  agri¬ 
cultural  practice  gave  any  attention  to  pruning  and  grafting  or  to  the  de¬ 
struction  of  insect  enemies.95  In  Pennsylvania  and  New  Jersey  greater  care 
was  taken  of  orchards.  There  trees  were  not  only  grafted  and  pruned,  but 
the  orchards  were  occasionally  plowed  and  seeded  with  maize,  rye,  or  oats.96 
Several  large  orchards  and  nurseries  had  been  developed  in  the  Middle  Colo¬ 
nies,  in  one  of  which,  that  of  Thomas  Young  of  Oyster  Bay,  New  York, 
there  were  over  27,000  apple  trees.97 

SPECIAL  CROPS— HEMP  AND  SILK. 

The  attempts  to  grow  hemp  throughout  the  northern  colonies  in  the 
eighteenth  century  need  explanation,  for  the  amount  of  labor  necessary  in 
the  cultivation  of  this  crop  and  for  the  preparation  of  the  fiber  for  market 
would  seem  to  have  doomed  the  experiments  to  failure  from  the  beginning. 
But  the  northern  farmers  were  bent  upon  finding  an  agricultural  staple,  some¬ 
thing  which  could  be  sold  to  a  wide  market  like  the  tobacco  of  Virginia;  and 
besides,  there  was  the  stimulus  of  the  bounties  offered  by  the  English  and 
colonial  governments.98  Although  grown  with  more  success  in  the  Middle 
Colonies,  particularly  in  New  Jersey,  than  in  New  England,  hemp  was 
never  raised  in  quantities  sufficient  for  the  supply  even  of  domestic  ship¬ 
yards.  The  failure  of  hemp  to  become  an  important  crop  was  owing  to  its 

93  Kalm,  Travels,  I,  70,  72;  American  Husbandry,  I,  156;  Acrelius,  in  Penn.  Hist.  Soc. 

Memoirs,  XI,  151 ;  Weld,  Travels,  I,  91. 

94  Flint,  in  Maine  Board  of  Agric.,  19th  Annual  Report,  115. 

95  Dwight,  Travels  (1821  ed.),  I,  76;  Belknap,  New  Hampshire,  III,  140. 

96  Acrelius,  in  Penn.  Hist.  Soc.  Memoirs,  XI,  152. 

97  Furman,  Long  Island  Antiquities,  I,  91;  Dwight,  Travels  (1821  ed.),  Ill,  322. 

98  Lord,  in  J.  H.  U.  Studies  in  Hist,  and  Pol.  Science,  extra  volume,  XVII,  83-86. 


FARMING  IN  THE  OLDER  SETTLEMENTS 


101 


inability  to  compete  with  grain  crops  for  the  limited  supply  of  fertile  land. 
The  author  of  American  Husbandry  99  observed  of  Pennsylvania: 

“P  is  not  want  of  good  land  in  certain  quantities,  nor  of  climate,  that  prevents  the 
export  of  hemp,  but  the  demand  for  it  at  Philadelphia,  which  exceeds,  for  home  consump¬ 
tion,  what  the  province  can  raise.  Improvements  might  be  made,  of  which  more  here¬ 
after  that  would  enable  Pennsylvania  to  export  hemp;  but  without  a  change  in  certain 
branches  of  rural  economy,  they  never  will  raise  this  commodity  for  exportation.  A 
people  increasmg  at  such  an  amazing  rate,  makes  the  necessaries  of  life  so  dear,  that  no 
o  er  husbandry  answers  so  well,  that  is,  they  possess  not  a  staple  that  will  pay  them 
for  a  neglect  of  wheat  and  common  provisions.”  y 


A  similar  situation  prevented  the  realization  of  visionary  dreams  of  the 
production  of  raw  silk.  Mulberry  trees  were  common,  and  it  was  easy  to 
show  that  silk  worms  could  be  fed  and  silk  reeled  from  the  cocoons.  Various 
amilies  did  it,  and  in  some  sections,  as  for  example  in  eastern  Connecticut, 
enough  silk  was  produced  to  attract  attention.  But  the  high  price  of  labor 

proved  an  insuperable  difficulty  to  the  establishment  of  silk  culture  a«  a 
branch  of  northern  farming.100 


CROP  YIELDS. 

Although  no  comprehensive  statistical  information  is  available,  a  general 
idea  of  the  yield  per  acre  of  the  various  field  crops  may  be  obtained  from 
the  comments  of  the  most  reliable  observers.101  As  regards  maize,  20  to  25 
bushels  an  acre  seems  to  have  been  considered  an  average  crop  on  fairly 
good  soil ;  crops  of  40  to  50  bushels  were  sometimes  secured  under  favorable 
conditions.  Dwight’s  estimate  of  the  average  crop  for  Connecticut  was  2 5 
bushels,  which  is  the  same  as  Strickland’s  for  New  York. 

Under  the  prevailing  system  of  cultivation  a  fair  average  wheat  crop  in 
the  Middle  Colonies  was  probably  between  10  and  15  bushels,  although  usu¬ 
ally  nearer  the  lower  figure.  Strickland  estimated  the  average  yield  in  New 
York  at  12  bushels  and  in  Pennsylvania  and  New  Jersey  at  only  6  bushels. 
Under  better  than  average  conditions,  as  on  new  land  in  the  Hudson  and  Mo¬ 
hawk  Valleys,  or  among  the  German  farmers  of  Pennsylvania,  crops  of  20 
to  30  bushels  might  be  obtained.  The  best  crops  reported  anywhere  were 
those  of  40  to  50  bushels  on  land  heavily  manured  with  fish  on  Long 
Island.  In  New  England  the  average  yield  seems  to  have  been  higher  than 
in  Pennsylvania  and  New  Jersey,  but  this  is  probably  owing  to  the  fact  that 
there  wheat  was  grown  only  on  the  more  fertile  soils.  Dwight  put  the  average 
Connecticut  at  15  bushels  and  Belknap  stated  that  in  New  Hampshire 
20  bushels  was  considered  “  a  paying  crop  ”  on  the  common  uplands,  although 
actually  less  was  often  obtained.  Rye  averaged  from  10  to  15  bushels.  The 

data  on  the  minor  cereals  and  on  flax  and  potatoes  are  too  fragmentary  to 
be  of  value. 


99  I,  162;  see  also  102,  137,  151. 

100  Kalm,  Travels,  I,  123;  American  Husbandry,  I,  165,  179;  Coxe,  View  of  U.  S.,  9 3; 

Dwight,  Travels  (1821  ed.),  I,  361. 

101  Dwight,  Travels  (1821  ed.),  I,  108;  Strickland,  Observations,  39,  42,  44;  Belknap, 

New  Hampshire  III,  136;  American  Husbandry,  I,  98,  99.  100,  135,  15 7,  160,  166; 
ouglass,  British  Settlements,  II,  208;  Cooper,  Information  Respecting  America, 
aAhin-gtTn’  Le!lers  °n  Agriculture,  38,  72,  83;  Schoepf,  Travels,  I,  130;  Phila- 
elphia  Agric.  Soc .Alemoirs,  I  (1815),  p.  991  Tilton,  in  American  Museum  V,  379; 
Mass.  Society  for  Promoting  Agric.  Papers  (1807),  14-19;  N.  Y.  Soc.  for  Promo¬ 
tion  of  Useful  Arts,  Transactions ,  I  (2d  ed.,  1801),  (1798),  240. 


Chapter  VIII. — Grazing  and  Livestock. 

HAY  AND  PASTURAGE. 

The  seeding  of  tilled  uplands  with  the  so-called  artificial  grasses  during  the 
interval  between  grain  crops  marked  an  important  step  in  crop  management 
over  the  old  system  of  weed  fallow.  It  was  a  step  of  great  significance  also 
from  the  point  of  view  of  the  livestock  industry,  for  the  creation  of  the 
so-called  artificial  meadows  provided  the  farm  animals  with  a  very  necessary 
addition  to  their  scanty  and  unreliable  forage.  As  the  stocks  of  cattle  increased, 
the  pasturage  afforded  by  the  natural  grasses  in  the  woods  and  meadows 
tended  to  bfcome  exhausted.  Kalm A  reported  in  1748  that  the  pasturage  in 
the  older  settlements  in  Pennsylvania  and  New  Jersey  was  failing,  assigning 
as  a  reason- the  great  increase  in  cattle  which  devoured  the  annual  grasses  so 
rapidly  that  they  had  no  opportunity  to  ripen  and  seed  themselves.  U 
account  of  the  persistence  of  the  practice  of  burning  the  woods  the  timber 
forage  was  also  unsatisfactory  and  declining.  The  worn-out  til  age  lands 
which  had  been  abandoned,  either  permanently  or  temporarily,  to  a  weed 
fallow  furnished  a  poor  sort  of  pasture,  often  appropriately  termed  brush 
pasture  Perhaps  one-half  the  area  of  the  farm  was  devoted  to  a  vast  pasture 
lot  “impoverished  and  skinned,”  producing  weeds,  sour  grass,  bayberry 

bushes,  and  briers. 

“  On  this  their  ill-fated  horses,  cows,  oxen,  and  sheep  are  promiscuously  turned  ear  y 
in  the1  season  before  there  is  a  bite:  but  they  nibble  off  the  scanty  growth  of  rubbish 
as  it  rises.  Here  they  continue  till  winter :  sometimes  through  the  winter ,  so  that  the 
ground  becomes  poached  and  trod  to  a  dead  closeness.  2 

Hav  was  cut  chiefly  from  the  natural  meadows  and  the  salt  marshes 
Large  quantities  of  coarse  hay,  chiefly  the  variety  known  as  Carex,  could 
thus  be  obtained  with  little  effort,  but  as  livestock  increased  these  sources 
proved  unreliable  and  after  a  drought  cattle  often  suffered  from  lack  of 

fodder.  Eliot  wrote  ( 1747 )  : 

“  The  scarcity  and  high  price  of  hay  and  corn  is  so  obvious,  that  there  are  few  or 
none  Ignorant  of  it,  at  least  here,  and  I  suppose  nearly  the  same  other  where,  or  worse , 
for  sundry  Vessels  have  been  in  these  Towns  from  other  parts,  to  load  with  sedge- 
irrass  to  supply  their  want  of  fodder  at  home.  This  scarcity  hath  been  gradually  in¬ 
fusing  upon  us  for  sundry  Years  past.  It  is  evident  that  the  necessary  stock  of  the 
Country  hath  out-grown  the  meadows,  so  that  there  is  not  hay  for  such  a  stoc  as  e 
present  increased  number  of  people  really  need :  such  an  high  price  of  hay,  takes  off 

much  from  the  profit  of  raising  and  keeping  stocks .  .  « 

“  This  scarcity  of  Hay  I  account  for  in  this  manner :  Our  first  Planters  who  settled 
down  by  the  Sea,  and  those  who  settled  by  the  large  Rivers  and  Intervale  Lands,  found 
so  much  salt  Marsh  by  the  Sea-side,  and  those  on  the  Rivers  and  Intervale  found  so  much 
mowing  Ground  more  than  they  had  Occasion  for,  that  they  Improved  only  such  Parts 
as  were  best  and  nearest  at  hand,  and  let  the  Rest  lie,  and  when  by  the  increase  ot 
People  they  wanted  more,  they  made  use  of  what  had  been  before  Neglected,  without 

1  Travels ,  I,  129;  134,  155- 

2  Bordley,  Essays  and  Notes,  143- 


102 


GRAZING  AND  LIVESTOCK 


103 


any  tho’t  or  care  to  provide  more;  and  Meadows  not  being  easily  or  speedily  bro’t  too 
many  are  drove  to  great  Straits.  This  may  be  one  Reason  why  some  inland  Towns 

are  better  provided  than  some  of  the  other  Towns,  as  considering  at  first  what  thev 
had  to  trust  to.”  8 

In  Lew  Jersey  the  author  of  American  Husbandry  noted  the  excessive 
reliance  in  marsh  hay,  remarking  that  the  result  was  that  “  in  no  province 
are  all  the  four-footed  animals  worse  treated.”  4 


IRRIGATION  OF  MEADOWS. 

The  iirigation  of  meadows  had  begun  in  the  German  settlements  in  Penn¬ 
sylvania  befoie  175°>  an(I  by  the  end  of  the  century  was  a  general  practice 
there.  Watered  meadows  ”  were  also  found  in  a  few  localities  in  New  Eng¬ 
land  and  in  New  York.  The  areas  of  the  natural  meadows  were  enlarged  by 
diverting  the  brooks  which  flowed  through  them  from  .their  original  channels, 
conducting  them  along  the  hillsides  and  then  distributing  the  water  by  lateral 
ditches  as  widely  as  possible  over  the  lowlands.  Such  improvements  often 
entailed  large  investment  of  capital.  But  the  resulting  increase  in  the  hay 
crops  seem  to  have  justified  the  expense.  In  Pennsylvania  “  farms  were 
valued  in  proportion  to  the  quantity  of  land  capable  of  irrigation,”  and  the 
watered  meadows  were  so  highly  regarded  that  “  when  the  original  tracts 
came  to  be  divided,  the  rights  thereto  were  carefully  set  forth  in  the  title- 
deeds,  generally  giving  the  use  and  control  of  the  stream  to  the  owners  of 
the  several  tracts  a  certain  number  of  days  in  each  week  alternately.”  5 
Another  improvement  of  the  mowing  land  was  the  draining  of  the  salt 
marshes  along  the  Delaware  River  by  means  of  dikes  and  tide  gates.  Many 
thousand  acres,  according  to  Acrelius,6  were  thus  reclaimed  in  the  years  1745— 
1760.  The  land  when  dry  was  ploughed,  seeded  with  grain  and  afterwards 
laid  down  to  clover  or  other  English  grass.  The  undertaking  did  not  prove 
a  permanent  success,  because  of  the  difficulty  in  keeping  the  dikes  intact. 


CULTIVATED  GRASSES — CLOVER  AND  TIMOTHY. 


Of  greater  significance  than  either  irrigation  or  drainage  enterprises  was 
the  making  of  the  so-called  “  artificial  meadows,”  i.  e.,  the  seeding  of  upland 
mowing  with  timothy,  red  clover,  and  other  English  grasses  of  the  eighteenth 
century.  English  grasses  were  not  unknown  before  1700,  having  been  sown 
usually  by  accident  and  occasionally  by  design.  The  progress  of  the  eigh¬ 
teenth  century  consisted  in  the  increased  sowing  of  such  grasses  on  tilled 
ground  and  in  the  substitution  of  selected  seed  for  the  sweepings  of  haymows. 
We  find  occasional  references  to  clover  growing  in  fields  before  the  Revolu¬ 
tion.  Kalm  7  observed  (1749)  that 


“  Red  Clover  was  sown  in  several  places  on  the  hills  without  the  town  [New  York] 
The  country  people  were  now  employed  in  mowing  the  meadows.  Some  were  already 


*  Field  Husbandry,  21,  23 ;  see  also  Buck,  Bucks  County ,  Penn.,  56. 

J38.  See  also  Mass.  Agric.  Repository,  II  (1807),  p.  29. 

K Lancaster  County,  Penn.,  347.  See  also  American  Husbandry,  I, 
166;  Kalm,  Travels,  I,  308;  Chastellux,  Travels,  306;  Dwight,  Travels  (1821 
11,^  2u5« 

!  L?  His,t-  Soc.  Penn.  Memoirs,  XI,  154.  See  also  Kalm,  Travels,  I,  330,  333. 

1  Travels,  II,  224.  '  ’  00  ’  °‘5'5 


100, 

ed.), 


104 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


mown ;  and  the  dry  clover  was  put  under  cover,  in  order  to  be  carried  away  the  first 
opportunity.”  „  ,, 

Acrelius  8  found  Pennsylvania  farmers  in  i7S9  sowing  clover-seed  after 
they  have  harrowed  in  their  wheat  to  make  the  crop  stronger.  te  rapi  ^ 
spread  of  clover  culture  dates,  however,  after  the  Revolution.  Watsoi 
rives  1780  as  the  date  of  the  first  improvement  of  upland  fields  by  clover 
in  the  neighborhood  of  Philadelphia.  In  Lancaster  and  Bucks  Counties  it 
was  hardly  known  before  1800.10  Watson  wrote: 11 

« It  became  a  wonder  to  see  men  making  grass,  and  hauling  it  in  from  upland  fields. 
Every  body  was  delighted  to  see  the  effect  of  this  new  era  m  farming.  The  aged^ow  ca 

LcrToS  as  Inadequate  to  provide  his  frugal  living  then,  unless  he  had  also  a  good 
portion ^o ^natural  meadow  to  supply  his  stock.  It  soon  came  to  be  -cpenenced  hat  fifty 
acres  of  land,  well  tilled,  produced  enough  to  fill  a  barn  of  double  the  size  before  used. 

A  grass  frequently  seeded  with  clover  was  variously  known  as  timothy 
in  the  Middle  Colonies  and  Herd’s  grass  in  New  England.  It  was  used  as  a 
hay  plant  near  Portsmouth,  New  Hampshire,  as  early  as  1720  and  was  taken 
to  New  York  and  other  colonies  by  one  Timothy  Hanson,  w  ence  1  s  na 
After  1750  it  is  frequently  mentioned.  Although  long  supposed  to  have 
been  indigenous  in  America,  it  is  now  recognized  as  an  Old  World  p 
growing  naturally  in  England  and  known  there  as  cats-ta.l  grass.  To  the 
America  farmers,  however,  belongs  the  credit  of  having  first  lecogn  z  d 
value  of  timothy  and  having  introduced  its  cultivation  as  a  forage  crop. 
The  author  of  American  Husbandry  was  impressed  with  the  large  crop  of 
timothy  hay  grown  in  New  England,  and  Strickland  13  was  even  more  en- 

thusiastic.  He  wrote : 

“  Timothy  grass  is  extensively  cultivated  in  the  middle  and  northern  states  of  the 
American  Union  and  I  apprehend  it  to  be  the  same  as  the  phleum  pratense ,  Cat  s-tail 
grass  of  European  botanists.  I  have  frequently  seen  extraordinary  crops  ot  it,  growing 
thickas  it  could  stand  on  the  ground,  three  or  four  feet  in  height,  and  in  some  ins^an 
coarse  as  wheat  straw;  however,  in  this  state,  as  it  is  cut  before  maturity,  and  as  in  the 
climate  of  America  hay  is  always  well  cured,  however  succulent  at  the  time  of  cutting, 
" prefer “to  evS  other  kind  of  hay,  and  thrive  better  upon  it  I  cannot  therefore 
but  think  it  worthy  of  some  fair  experiments  in  this  country.  No  other  grass  approaches 
it  in  produce ;  and  it  is  particularly  useful  when  mixed  with  red  clover,  in  preventing 
it  from  falling  too  close  to  the  ground.  ’ 

The  introduction  of  cultivated  grasses,  although  of  such  recent  date,  by  the 
opening  of  the  nineteenth  century  had  caused  less  reliance  on  the  meadows 
for  hay.  In  Pennsylvania,  wrote  Bordley 14  in  1801 : 

“the  irrigated  and  bottom  meadow  lands  are  now  thought  lightly  of,  in  comparison 
w  th  the  very  high  estimation  they  were  in  before  clover  came  into  field  culture  Still 
irrigated  -rounds  are,  as  they  ever  will  be,  very  valuable :  but  so  sure  and  plentiful  are 
clover  crops  that  the  Pennsylvania  farmers  are  less  solicitous  about  meadows.  Till 
lately  a  farm  without  irrigated  or  bottom  meadow,  was  never  much  valued.  Now,  pur 

s  In  Hist.  Soc.  Penn.  Memoirs,  XI,  154- 

9  Annals  of  Philadelphia,  II,  66  (1844  ed.). 

10  Buck,  Bucks  County,  56;  Ellis  and  Evans  Lancaster  County,  349- 

11  Annals  of  Philadelphia,  II,  66  (1844  ed.).  VTT  ✓  _c\  n  T 

12  Piper  and  Bort,  in  Journal  Am.  Society  of  Agronomy,  VII  (1915),  P-  x- 

13  Observations,  63. 

14  Essays  and  Notes,  31,  note. 


GRAZING  AND  LIVESTOCK 


105 


chasers  are  less  anxious  for  those  articles,  as  they  are  sure  of  abounding  in  clover  and 
hay  from  the  arable  upland.” 

Table  9  indicates  the  relative  importance  for  Massachusetts  of  the  various 
sources  of  the  hay  crop.  In  reading  the  figures  for  yields  per  acre,  one  should 
keep  in  mind  the  taxpayers’  natural  tendency  to  understatement. 


Table  9. — Hay — English  upland,  fresh  meadow,  and  salt  marsh — acreage,  tonnage  and 

yield  per  acre,  six  counties  in  Massachusetts,  1801. 

[From  Massachusetts  valuation  returns.] 


Acres. 

P.  ct.  of 
acreage. 

Tons. 

Tons  per 
acre. 

Hampshire  County: 

65,410 

O.83 

Total  hay  crop . 

79J52 

IOO 

English  upland  . 

46,941 

59-3 

4L799 

.99 

Fresh  meadow  . 

32,211 

40.7 

23,6ll 

•73 

Salt  marsh  . 

0 

0.0 

0 

0.0 

Berkshire  County: 

.87 

Total  hay  crop . 

39,275 

IOO 

33,999 

English  upland  . 

28,558 

72.7 

25,774 

.90 

Fresh  meadow  . 

10,717 

27-3 

8,225 

•77 

Salt  marsh  . 

0 

0.0 

0 

0.0 

Worcester  County: 

83,084 

.82 

Total  hay  crop . 

101,291 

IOO 

English  upland  . 

47,680 

47.1 

39,748 

.83 

Fresh  meadow  . 

53,611 

52.9 

43  336 

.81 

Salt  marsh  . 

0 

0.0 

0 

0.0 

Middlesex  County : 

50,156 

Total  hay  crop . 

70,920 

IOO 

•71 

English  upland  . 

30,737 

43.3 

21,061 

.69 

Fresh  meadow . 

37,691 

53-2 

26,902 

•7i 

Salt  marsh  . 

2,492 

3-5 

2,193 

.88 

Norfolk  County: 

24,238 

Total  hay  crop . 

41,369 

IOO 

•59 

English  upland  . 

22.156 

53-3 

11,292 

•51 

Fresh  meadow  . 

16,613 

40.2 

11,007 

.66 

Salt  marsh  . 

2,700 

6.5 

L939 

.72 

Essex  County: 

39,4i6 

Total  hay  crop . 

54,901 

IOO 

•72 

English  upland  . 

22,826 

41.6 

14584 

.64 

Fresh  meadow  . 

17,463 

31.8 

12,270 

•70 

Salt  marsh  . 

14,612 

26.6 

12,562 

.86 

Summary : 

386,908 

296,303 

Total  hay  crop . 

IOO 

•77 

English  upland  . 

198,798 

514 

154,258 

.78 

Fresh  meadow  . 

168,306 

43.5 

125,351 

•70 

Salt  marsh  . 

19,804 

5.1 

16,694 

.84 

NUMBER  AND  KINDS  OF  LIVESTOCK  KEPT 
ON  TYPICAL  FARMS. 

Neat  cattle,  horses,  swine,  and  poultry  were  kept  on  all  farms,  and  sheep, 
as  well,  on  a  great  many.  The  equipment  of  livestock  on  typical  farms  in 
eastern  Massachusetts  appears  to  have  been  1  or  2  horses,  1  or  2  yoke  of  oxen, 
15  head  of  cattle,  including  5  dairy  cows,  about  as  many  swine  as  cows,  and, 
on  half  the  farms  a  flock  of  10  to  20  sheep.15  In  Bucks  County,  Pennsylvania, 


15  Mass.  Agric.  Soc.  Papers  (1807),  p.  35. 


106 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


it  was  estimated  (1791)  that  a  farm  of  200  acres  would  on  the  average  sup¬ 
port  12  head  of  cattle,  including  5  milch  cows,  20  store  sheep,  10  hogs,  and 
10  dozen  poultry.16 

From  the  Chester  County,  Pennsylvania,  tax  lists  for  1765,  table  10  has 
been  compiled,  showing  the  number  of  horses,  cattle,  and  sheep  on  the  aver¬ 
age  farm, 


Table  10. — Livestock  on  farms /  Chester  County,  Pennsylvania,  1765. 

[From  tax  lists  in  Pennsylvania  Archives,  3d  series,  XI,  1— 1 33-1 


Total  number  of  farms  taxed. . . 

Average  acreage  . 

Horses : 

Total  number  reported . 

Farms  reporting  . 

Per  cent  of  all  farms . 

Average  number  of  horses  re¬ 
ported  .  2.7 


a  According  to  the  law  of  1785  all  horses  and  cattle 
does  not  state  age  of  livestock  to  be  taxed. 


Cattle : 

Total  number  reported .  10,846 

Farms  reporting  .  2,934 

Per  cent  of  all  farms .  89.1 

Average  number  of  cattle  re¬ 
ported  .  37 

Sheep : 

Total  number  reported .  14,042 

Farms  reporting  .  1,967 

Per  cent  of  all  farms .  597 

Average  number  of  sheep  re¬ 
ported  .  7-1 


over  3  years  were  taxable.  Previous  act  (1762) 


3,293 

135 

8,022 

2,944 

89.4 


The  Massachusetts  valuation  returns  for  1771  for  four  towns  in  the 
Connecticut  Valley  give  the  following  results. 


Table  ii. — Livestock  on  farms  in 

[From  Massachusetts  valuation  r 

Total  number  of  farms  taxed. . .  400® 


Horses,  over  3  years .  426 

Average  per  farm .  1.06 

Oxen,  over  4  years .  539 

Average  per  farm .  1.35 


a  Estimated  on  basis  of  population  and  number 


ur  towns  in  the  Connecticut  Valley. 
rns,  1771,  in  Judd,  Hadley,  385 -3 


Cows,  over  3  years .  9*4 

Average  per  farm .  2.28 

Sheep,  over  1  year . 2  388 

Average  per  farm .  8.46 

Swine  over  1  year .  601 

Average  per  farm .  1.50 

families. 


The  largest  number  of  horses  on  any  farm  was  4,  of  oxen  6,  of  cows  9,  and 
of  sheep  40.  In  comparing  the  Pennsylvania  figures  with  those  for  Massa¬ 
chusetts,  the  oxen  and  cows  in  table  1 1  should  be  added  together,  giving  an 
average  of  3.6  per  farm  or  practically  the  same  figure  as  for  cattle  in  Penn¬ 
sylvania.  Figures  for  215  farms  in  Falmouth,  Maine,  1760,  show  on  the 
average  1  horse  per  farm,  2  oxen,  3  or  4  cows,  9  or  10  sheep,  and  1  or  2 
swine  over  one  year.17 

There  were  a  few  regions  in  which  the  grazing  industry  had  become  spe¬ 
cialized  where  livestock  farming  was  carried  on  on  a  large  scale.  In  the 
Narragansett  country  (Washington  County,  Rhode  Island)  about  the  middle 
of  the  eighteenth  century  we  find  farms  ranging  from  several  hundred  to 
several  thousand  acres,  supporting  20  to  40  horses,  25  to  50  dairy  cows,  and 
several  hundred  sheep  each.18 


16  Washington,  Letters  on  Agric.  (Knight  ed.),  73. 

17  MSS.  in  Mass.  Archives,  Boston,  Mass. 

18  Updike,  Narragansett  Church,  I,  216. 


GRAZING  AND  LIVESTOCK 


107 


In  the  back  country  of  Pennsylvania  the  range  system  of  cattle  raising 
was  pursued.  The  author  of  American  Husbandry  wrote : 19 

“  Many  of  the  planters,  especially  in  the  back  parts  of  the  province,  where  the  wild 
tracts  are  adjoining,  keep  great  stocks  of  cattle :  some  of  them  have  from  forty  to  sixty 
horses ;  and  four  or  five  hundred  head  of  horned  cattle,  oxen,  cows,  bulls,  calves,  and 
young  cattle ;  they  let  them  run  through  the  woods,  not  only  in  summer,  but  also  in 
winter;  which  is  a  circumstance  that  makes  them  very  inattentive  to  the  providing 
winter  food 

THE  CARE  AND  MANAGEMENT  OF  LIVESTOCK. 

The  eighteenth  century  farmers  showed  little  advance  over  the  first  settlers 
in  their  care  of  livestock.  The  lack  of  adequate  winter  shelter  and  of  a  suit¬ 
ably  balanced  winter  ration  were  still  glaring  faults.  Combined  with  lack 
of  selection  in  breeding,  the  result  was  small,  semi-starved,  ill-formed,  and 
unproductive  animals.  Kalm  20  wrote  (1748)  : 

“  All  the  cattle  has  been  originally  brought  over  from  Europe.  The  natives  have 
never  had  any,  and  at  present  few  of  them  care  to  get  any.  But  the  cattle  degenerates 
by  degrees  here,  and  becomes  smaller.  For  the  cows,  horses,  sheep,  and  hogs,  are  all 
larger  in  England,  though  those  which  are  brought  over  are  of  that  breed.  But  the 
first  generation  decreases  a  little,  and  the  third  and  fourth  is  of  the  same  size  with  the 
cattle  already  common  here.  The  climate,  the  soil,  and  the  food,  altogether  contribute 
their  share  toward  producing  this  change.” 

The  exceptions  to  this  general  condemnation  occurred  in  localities  where 
production  for  a  market  was  important.  Just  at  the  end  of  the  century  there 
was  improvement  by  importation  of  cattle,  sheep,  and  horses,  but  this  episode 
belongs  to  the  agricultural  progress  of  the  nineteenth  century. 

NEAT  CATTLE. 

Cattle  were  housed  in  New  England  and  New  York  State  during  the 
winter  months.  Belknap  21  reported  : 

“  Cattle  are  housed  from  the  beginning  of  November,  ....  By  the  beginning  of 
May,  the  grass  is  sufficiently  grown  for  cattle  to  live  abroad;  good  husbandmen  do 
not  permit  them  to  feed  till  the  twenty-first  of  May ;  but  scarcity  of  fodder  obliges  the 
poorer  sort  to  depart  from  this  rule.” 

In  southern  New  England  the  pasturage  season  was  longer,  and  in  towns 
along  the  Sound  may  have  extended  the  year  through.22  In  Pennsylvania  and 
New  Jersey  stables  and  cowhouses  were  seldom  seen,  and  the  cattle  as  a 
rule  were  left  out  all  winter  to  pick  up  their  living  in  the  woods.23  There 
were  exceptions.  Acrelius  24  wrote : 

“  A  good  housekeeper  has  a  stable  with  thin  sides  for  the  horses,  and  sheds  for  the 
cattle  and  sheep  built  near  the  barn,  and  standing  out  in  the  stable-yard,  so  that  they 
may  be  protected  there  when  the  weather  is  severe.” 

Better  care  of  livestock  was  one  of  the  many  features  which  distinguished 
the  farming  of  the  thrifty  Germans  from  that  of  their  English  neighbors. 

19  I,  166;  see  also  Acrelius,  in  Hist.  Soc.  Penn.  Memoirs,  XI,  154. 

20  Travels,  I,  102. 

21  New  Hampshire,  III,  19. 

22  Coffin,  Tour  to  Rhode  Island,  in  Maine  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  1st  series,  IV,  270. 

23  Kalm,  Travels,  II,  50;  American  Husbandry,  I,  99,  132,  164. 

24  In  Hist.  Soc.  Penn.  Memoirs,  XI,  155. 


108 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


They  kept  less  stock,  but  kept  them  better.  The  German  barns,  which  will 
be  described  later  were  well  known  at  the  end  of  the  eighteenth  century. 
Rush  25  wrote : 

“  They  keep  their  horses  and  cattle  as  warm  as  possible  in  winter,  by  which  means 
they  save  a  great  deal  of  their  hay  and  grain;  for  those  animals  when  cold,  eat  much 
more  than  when  they  are  in  a  more  comfortable  situation.” 

Hay  remained  the  chief  winter  feed  for  cattle,  but  owing  to  the  practice 
of  sowing  clover  and  timothy  on  uplands,  it  was  better  hay  and  there  was  more 
of  it.  In  addition,  cattle  were  given  cornstalks  and  the  straw  of  rye  and 
other  small  grains.  Potatoes  and  other  root  crops  are  occasionally  men¬ 
tioned  as  food  for  cattle,  but  seem  to  have  been  used  to  a  very  limited  extent.26 
A  distinction  was  already  made  between  the  food  of  stock  which  were  being 
fattened  and  that  of  other  animals.  Bordley  2‘  wrote: 

“  In  America  we  keep  cattle  through  the  winters,  on  straw,  maize  fodder,  and  husks, 
giving  them  water ;  and  fatten  on  hay,  and  cut  straw  with  meal ;  or  as  in  Maryland,  with 
maize  fodder  and  broken  ears  of  maize,  in  the  winter:  on  grass  in  summer. 


CATTLE  RAISING  AND  BEEF  FATTENING. 

In  general,  the  farmers  did  not  specialize  in  any  particular  branch  of 
livestock  industry.  Their  cattle  were  not  only  dual  but  triple  purpose  animals. 
They  furnished  motive  power  for  plowing  and  hauling,  as  well  as  meat  and 
dairy  products.  Beef  was  “  salted  down,’’  chiefly  for  home  consumption, 
but  in  many  localities  a  small  amount  could  be  marketed.  The  animals 
slaughtered  were  chiefly  old  cows  and  worn-out  oxen  weighing  perhaps  400  to 
500  pounds  dressed.28  However,  in  a  few  regions  specialization  had  devel¬ 
oped.  In  the  back  country  of  Pennsylvania  and  the  uplands  of  Virginia  and 
North  Carolina  range  cattle  were  raised  which  were  driven  overland  to  the 
neighborhood  of  Philadelphia,  where  they  were  fattened  for  market.  Tilton  29 
described  the  stall-feeding  industry  in  upper  Delaware  as  follows : 

“  Some  few  farmers  have  the  large  English  breed  of  cattle ;  but  the  most  prevailing 
are  of  the  smaller  kind.  These  are  bred  in  the  greatest  number  on  the  marshes  and 
forests  of  the  two  lower  counties;  from  whence  they  are  driven  in  large  droves  to  the 
county  of  Newcastle,  where  the  most  cultivated  meadows  abound,  and  they  are  grazed 
and  stall-fed  for  the  markets  of  Wilmington  and  Philadelphia.  Fattening  cattle,  during 
the  warm  weather,  run  at  large  in  grazing  grounds,  changing  them  occasionally,  from 
field  to  field;  in  the  winter,  such  as  are  stall-fed  are  put  each  into  a  separate  stall  and 
fed  with  the  most  luxuriant  hay.  There  is  a  prevailing  opinion,  that  beef  is  firmer  and 
in  all  respects  better,  when  fatted  upon  grass  than  upon  grain.” 

On  the  bog  meadows  and  marshes  of  eastern  New  Jersey  the  farmers 
raised  cattle  for  sale  to  graziers. 

The  hills  of  northern  New  England  were  well  adapted  to  cattle  raising,  and 
droves  from  Vermont  and  New  Hampshire  were  taken  overland  to  New 

25  In  Penn.  German  Soc.  Proceedings  and  Addresses ,  XIX,  62. 

26  Allen,  Vermont,  in  Vt.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  I,  484;  Wheeler,  Brunswick,  Maine,  221 ; 

American  Husbandry,  I,  164. 

27  Essays  and  Notes,  159. 

28  Rev.  Timothy  Walker’s  Diaries,  in  N.  H.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  IX,  139,  169. 

29  American  Museum,  V,  381. 


GRAZING  AND  LIVESTOCK 


109 


York  and  to  Boston,  and  occasionally  to  Philadelphia.  In  Hadley  and  neighbor¬ 
ing  Connecticut  River  towns  the  stall-feeding  of  oxen  for  the  Boston  market 
had  begun  as  early  as  1700.30 

The  development  of  a  large  and  strong  race  of  cattle  was  the  ambition 
of  the  New  England  graziers,  because  of  their  value  as  draft  animals. 
Burnaby  leported  that  the  largest  oxen  in  America  were  raised  in  Rhode 
Island,  some  of  them  weighing  1600  to  1800  pounds.31  Of  more  reliability 
aie  the  records  of  a  meat  packer  in  Northampton,  Massachusetts,  about  the 

year  1750,  which  showed  the  average  dressed  weight  of  12  oxen  to  be  767 
pounds.32  '  ' 


DAIRYING. 


Butter  and  cheese  were  made  on  all  farms  for  home  consumption  and  in 
some  localities,  especially  in  New  England,  for  export  as  well.  Owing  to 
lack  of  careful  methods,  the  butter  was  usually  poor,  and  in  the  absence 
of  refrigerating  facilities  had  to  be  heavily  salted.  In  northern  Vermont  the 
Scotch  settlers  were  successfully  producing  a  good  grade  of  butter  before 
1800,  which  was  sold  in  Boston.33 

Windham  and  Litchfield  Counties  in  Connecticut  and  the  Narragansett 
country  in  Rhode  Island  produced  cheese  in  large  quantities  for  export  to  the 

southern  States  and  the  West  Indies.  Of  the  town  of  Goshen,  Connecticut 
Dwight 34  wrote : 


It  is,  perhaps,  the  best  grazing  ground  in  the  State :  and  the  inhabitants  are  probably 
more  wealthy,  than  any  other  collection  of  farmers  in  New-England,  equally  numerous. 
I  he  quantity  of  cheese,  made  by  them  annually,  is  estimated  at  four  hundred  thousand 
pounds  weight.  Butter  is  also  made  in  great  quantities.  The  houses  are  good  farmers’ 

.  ouses-  There  are  a  few  in  a  superiour  style.  The  inhabitants  are  distinguished  for 
industry,  sobriety,  good  order,  and  good  morals.” 


On  the  extensive  Rhode  Island  farms,  dairying  was  a  commercial  industry 
by  the  middle  of  the  eighteenth  century.  Douglass  35  wrote : 

“The  most  considerable  Farms  are  in  the  Narragansett  Country.  Their  highest  Dairy 
oi  one  harm  commumbus  annis  milks  about  no  Cows,  cuts  about  200  Load  of  Hav 
makes  about  13  000  Wt  of  Cheese,  besides  Butter;  and  sells  off  considerably  in  Calves 

wf  ?l^,ocks-  A  from  73  milch  Cows  in  five  Months  made  about 

Ts!  m°  TC  eeS.ei  besides  Cheese  in  a  Season,  one  Cow  yields  one  Firken  of  Butter, 
/o  to  80  Wt.  In  good  Land  they  reckon  after  the  rate  of  2  Acres  for  a  Milch  Cow.” 

The  scale  on  which  the  industry  was  conducted  is  shown  by  the  following 
gures  from  Updike : 36  Farm  A,  700  acres,  42  cows,  annual  product,  9,200 
pounds  of  cheese;  farm  B,  350  acres,  36  cows,  8,000  pounds  of  cheese;  farm 
C,  100  cows,  13,000  pounds  of  cheese.  Tradition  asserts  that  the  recipe  for 

30  Judd,  Hadley,  368 .  On  this  subject  see  also  Schoepf,  Travels,  I,  213;  Strickland 

Travels  (l821  ed*)>  n»  458;  Belknap,  New  Hampshire, 
*43,  Dean,  Atlas  of  V ermont,  7;  Smith,  New  Jersey,  I,  487. 

31  Travels,  123.  / 

32  Quoted  in  Thompson,  History  of  Stock  Raising,  ch.  II,  40.  (MS.  in  U.  S.  Dept,  of 

Agriculture,  Washington,  D.  C.)  v  y 

33  Miller  and  Wells,  Rye  gate,  Vermont,  193. 

3 4  Travels  (1821  ed.),  II,  374. 

35  British  Settlements,  II,  100. 

36  Narragansett  Church,  I,  219. 


110  AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 

Narragansett  cheese  was  brought  from  Gloucestershire  and  was  the  same  as 
that  for  the  celebrated  Cheshire  cheese. 


SHEEP. 

Sheen  became  of  steadily  increasing  importance  in  northern  agriculture  in 
the  eighteenth  century,  particularly  in  New  England.  In  general,  that  sec¬ 
tion  was  showing  greater  adaptation  to  grazing  than  to  tillage,  and  within 
New  England  there  were  localities  where  sheep-raising  was  more  pro  a  e 
than  other  branches  of  the  livestock  industry.  On  the  islands  off  the  coast 
of  southern  New  England  and  in  Rhode  Island,  although  the  forage  was 
hoarse  the  winters  were  not  severe  and  besides  the  surrounding  ocean  saved 
the  expense  of  inclosures  and  shepherding.  In  localities  such  as  Martha  s 
Vineyard,  Nantucket,  and  in  the  Narragansett  country  where  the  floe  s 
numbered  several  thousands,37  wool  became  a  commercial  product,  but  in 
general,  both  in  New  England  and  in  the  Middle  Colonies  sheep  were  raised 
as  a  Dart  of  the  self -sufficient  farm  economy,  and  not  as  a  business.  ey 
produced  wool  for  the  manufacture  of  homespun  textiles  and  not  for  sale. 
Richard  Peters  wrote  to  Washington  of  sheep  raising  in  Pennsylvania. 

“  It  is  a  profitable  article,  so  far  as  you  can  extend  it,  but  no i  great ■  beue "e 

1  A  it.  and  if  the  business  was  more  extensively  carried  on,  the  profit  would  De 

f  -F  I  know  none  who  have  tried  the  sheep  business  that  have 

knrrTeded  “  FoldfnVis  very  well,  but  it  requires  labour ;  and  the  sheep,  crowded  together 
here  have  often  perished.  I  cannot  ascertain  how  many  an  acre  will  support;  for  none 
ar  kept!  wkhTn  my  knowledge,  but  in  small  numbers  and  as  a  variety  in  a  farmers 
stock.  They  are  close  feeders,  and  destroy  pasture  prodigiously. 

Wool  and  not  mutton  was  the  object  of  sheep-raising.  The  meat  could 
not  be  successfully  preserved  by  salting  or  smoking,  and  consequently  there 
was  no  export  market.  The  farmers  didn’t  like  the  taste  of  fresh  lamb  or 
mutton,  probably  because  of  their  own  negligence  in  slaughtering.  Ih 
typical  sheep  of  the  period  were  small,  long-legged,  narrow  in  the  breast 
and  back,  and  also  slow  at  arriving  at  maturity.  They  may  have  stood  2j 
feet  high  and  weighed  when  dressed  from  10  to  15  pounds  per  quarter,  or 
in  exceptional  cases  20  pounds.  They  yielded  on  the  average  from  2  to  3 
pounds  of  coarse,  short-staple  wool  at  a  shearing.39  Of  the  quality  of  Amer- 
ican  wool  Burnaby  40  wrote  : 

<*  Upon  the  best  inquiry  I  could  make,  I  was  not  able  to  discover  that  any  one  had 
ever  seen  a  staple  of  American  wool  longer  than  seven  inches  ;  whereas  in  the  counties 
of  Lincoln  and  Leicester,  they  are  frequently  twenty-two  inches  long. _ _ _ 

37  Wright,  Wool  Growing  and  the  Tariff ,  2.. 

33  Washington,  Letters  on  Agriculture  (Knight  ed. ),  86.  >  q 

39  Tilton,  in  American  Museum ,  V,  382;  Strickland,  Observations,  59.  MoS,',SrjwW 

Papers  1807,  p.  38.  U.  S.  Dept.  Agriculture,  Special  Report  on  Sheep  Industry 

(1892),  p.  74- 

40  Travels,  136. 


GRAZING  AND  LIVESTOCK 


111 

Attempts  to  improve  the  breed  of  sheep  by  importation  of  rams  from  Eng¬ 
land  were  made  as  early  as  1760  and,  notwithstanding  a  drastic  prohibiten 

on  the  part  of  the  English  government,  a  small  number  were  smuggled  into 
the  country.41  b& 

SWINE. 

familT7  SWine  Snd  fattened  4  or  5  hogs,  which  supplied  his 

‘  ly  with  salt  pork  an  essential  article  of  their  diet,  and  left  a  small 

suip  us  for  sale..  In  New  England  a  growing  export  trade  in  barreled  pork 
was  developing  in  the  eighteenth  century  and  large  quantities  were  sold  for 
the  provisioning  of  the  fishing  fleets.  Swine  were  fed  on  dairy  and  kitchen 
vaste  in  the  summer  or  allowed  to  run  at  large  in  the  woods. 

in  hfj°hn  a S  lhe  fac°rns’  b«ech-nuts,  &c.  begin  to  fall,  they  are  driven  to  the  woods 
m  large  herds,  to  feed  on  them.  The  delicacy,  taste  and  nutrition  of  these  nuts  are 
particularly  suited  to  the  palate  of  these  animals,  so  that  in  a  short  time  they  srrow 
to  a  great  size.  The  hog  prefers  the  beech-nut  to  any  other  and  the  effect  o/th-n 

argoodnsCwine  year  «  “  gr°Wth  “d  **  henCe  a  g°°d  beech  nut  “V  be  called 

After  harvest  the  swine  were  shut  up  and  those  which  were  to  be  slaugh¬ 
tered  were  fattened  for  a  few  weeks,  principally  on  Indian  corn,  with  the 
iron  sometimes  of  potatoes  or  other  root  crops,  peas,  and  beans.  The 

"S“?‘ S'r?  t0  Slaufhter  h°Ss  at  18  months,  when  they  would  weigh 
m  the  Middle  Colonies  and  in  most  parts  of  New  England  about  200  pounds. 

eastcyn  Massaohusetts  the  usual  weight  was  given  as  from  250  to  400 
pounds,  but  probably  hogs  of  over  300  pounds  were  unusual.  Some  farmers 
kept  their  hogs  over  two  winters,  others  slaughtered  at  8,  10,  or  12  months.43 

DRAFT  ANIMALS— OXEN  AND  HORSES. 

In  New  England  the  ox  remained  the  chief  reliance  of  the  farmers  as  a 
working  animal.  Up  to  1750  there  were  few  sleighs  or  wheel  vehicles  light 
enough  for  horses  to  draw,  and  they  were  used  chiefly  for  riding.  In  the 
alter  half  of  the  century  the  use  of  horses  increased.  For  light  tasks,  such 
as  cultivating  corn  and  harrowing,  they  were  used  alone  and  for  heavier 
work  together  with  oxen,  the  horse  often  being  the  leader  of  the  team.  At 
he  beginning  of  the  nineteenth  century  oxen  were  still  about  50  per  cent  more 
numerous  than  horses  in  eastern  Massachusetts,  but  their  declining  importance 
is  clearly  evident  from  the  figures  given  in  table  12. 

In  Connecticut  in  1796  there  were  36,791  oxen  4  years  old  and  upward 
an  37>9°7  worses  3  years  old  and  upward,  giving  a  ratio  of  103  oxen  to  100 

41L°Jh  “I'  SC?  E^?t’  Field  Husbandry,  14.  The  law  referred  to  is  8  Elizabeth 

The  Pe?alty  imposed  by  this  act  “for  conveying  any  sheep  alive 
out  of  this  Realme  was,  for  the  first  offence  the  loss  of  the  offender's Entire  estate 

offence^he  penak^was  ^death.  bSS  °f  *  “  **  se^d 

A-llen,  in  Vt.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  I,  483. 

Notes,  186 ;  Washington,  Letters  on  Agriculture  (Knight  ed.) 
u;’  feeler,  Brunswick,  Maine,  221;  Diaries  of  Rev.  Timothy  Walker  in  N  h’ 
Hist  Soc.  Collections,  IX  143,  169;  Belknap,  New  Hampshire,  III  145’  American 
Husbandry,  I,  55;  Mass.  Agric.  Soc.  Papers  (1807),  p.  39.  '  45  ’  /imerican 


112 


agriculture  in  northern  united  states 


horses  II  Is  significant  that  horses  outnumbered  oxen  in  the  three  counties 
where  on  account  of  fertile  soil  and  relatively  easy  access  to  markets,  the 
beginnings  of  commercial  agriculture  were  most  evident.  On  Long  sand 
bofh  oxen  and  horses  were  used  frequently  in  the  same  team.  During  t 
Revolution,  when  the  British  had  commandeered  horses  and  oxen,  unspayed 


Table  12 .—Horses  and  oxen  in  three  counties  in  Massachusetts,  1767  and  1801. 

[From  Massachusetts  valuation  returns.]  _ _ 


- -  - 

County. 

Horses,  3  years  old  and 
over. 

Oxen,  4  years  old  and 
over. 

Ratio,  oxen  to  ioo 
horses. 

1767. 

1801. 

1767. 

1801. 

1767. 

i8ox. 

ATiddleceY  . 

3492 

2,156 

3,451 

5,230 

3,064 

3  909 

6,028 

2,969 

4,930 

8,367 

3,824 

5,540 

172 

137 

143 

l60 

125 

142 

iVIlUUiCDCA  . 

XT/^-rf olk  .  . . 

Essex  . 

Qummcirv  . 

9,099 

12,203 

13,927 

17,731 

153 

145 

j  . 

cows  were  used  in  the  yoke,  but  only  a  few  farmers  continued  this  practice 
when  the  emergency  had  passed.  In  New  York,  New  Jersey,  and  Pennsy  - 
vania  the  disappearance  of  oxen  was  taking  place  so  rapidly  after  the  Revolu¬ 
tion  as  to  occasion  serious  alarm  to  the  “agricultural  economists  of  the 
day  A  writer  in  the  American  Museum  stated . 

“  Formerly  it  was  the  custom,  in  several  of  these  states,  to  Plous!l,anfdfhar™"n‘';ee 
land!  aTweU  as  convey  their  produce  to  market,  by  means  of  oxen.  That  frugal  mode 


Table  13. — Horses  and  Oxen  in  Connecticut  Counties,  1796- 

[From  MS.  tax  lists  in  comptroller’s  office,  Hartford,  Connecticut.] 


County. 

Horses,  3  years 
old. 

Oxen,  4  years 
and  over. 

Ratio:  Oxen  to 
100  horses. 

Hartford  . 

5,878 

5,816 

98.9 

NTpiv  Haven  . 

4,293 

4,689 

IO9.2 

4452 

4,448 

I07.I 

Fairfield  .  . . 

6,300 

6,255 

99-3 

\AJindViam  . 

4,493 

4,686 

104.3 

87.9 

T  itchfield  .  , . 

7,570 

6,656 

A/fiddleneY  . 

i,943 

3,016 

155-2 

Tolland  . 

2,162 

2,341 

108.3 

^Itate  total  ...... 

36,791 

37,907 

103.0 

wJ  LCllC  L W  L IA a.  •  •  • 

.  God  rarriace  is  at  this  time  almost  wholly  discontinued ;  and  such  is  the  force  of 
custom  and  prfjudice,  that  I  know  many  persons  who  would  sooner  carry  their  ar 
to  market  on  their  own  shoulders,  than  be  seen  driving  an  ox  team. 

A  few  years  later  a  correspondent  from  Burlington,  New  Jersey,  summed 
up  the  case  against  horses  as  follows : 

“The  first  cost  and  charges  of  maintaining  horses  upon  a  f,ar™’ HmelTth^expeLe 
most  moderate  calculation,  be  computed  at  less  than  twice  or  three  times  thejM>__ 


44  HI  (1788),  p.  455- 


GRAZING  AND  LIVESTOCK 


113 


attending  a  number  of  oxen,  sufficient  to  perform  the  same  labour.  Horses  are,  from 
their  nature,  a  more  precarious  property— subject  to  a  greater  variety  of  accidents  and 
diseases ,  and,  when  past  labour,  occasion  a  heavy  loss  to  the  proprietors  of  them.  On 
the  contrary,  a  well-trained  ox  increases  in  value  until  he  be  nine  or  ten  years  old  ;  and 
the  profit  from  his  labour  in  the  mean  time,  amply  repays  the  farmer  every  expense 
incurred  in  raising  and  training  him  to  service:  and  when  no  longer  capable  of  labour, 
instead  of  subjecting  his  owner  to  a  heavy  loss  by  death,  he  yields  a  handsome  profit! 
If  therefore  an  ox,  when  fatted  for  beef  at  ten  years  old,  will  produce  a  sum  equal  to 
the  expense  of  maintaining  him  until  that  period,  it  follows,  as  an  obvious  truth,  that  all 
his  labour  is  a  clear  profit  to  the  farmer,”  45 


THE  NARRAGANSETT  PACERS. 

The  breeding  of  horses  seems  to  have  been  carried  on  rather  generally. 
The  export  of  horses  to  the  West  Indies  from  southern  New  England  con¬ 
tinued  an  important  branch  of  trade  until  the  Revolution,  and  horse  raising 
was  there  a  branch  of  the  livestock  industry  of  comparable  importance  with 
sheep  and  cattle  raising.  Mules  were  also  raised  for  export  in  Windham  and 
Worcester  Counties.  The  small,  hardy  animals  shipped  from  Connecticut 
ports  and  from  New  York  often  included  Canadian  horses  which  had  been 
brought  overland  in  the  winter  and  fattened  before  export  in  the  spring 
and  summer.40 

The  eighteenth  century  saw  the  development  of  two  celebrated  breeds  of 
horses  in  the  northern  colonies,  the  Narragansett  pacers  of  Rhode  Island 
and  the  Conestoga  horses  of  Pennsylvania.  The  pacers  were  of  uncertain 
origin,  by  some  they  were  said  to  have  been  imported  from  Andalusia,  in 
Spain.  They  were  a  small  hardy  breed  remarkable  for  their  peculiar  and 
comfortable  gait  and  for  their  fleetness.  MacSparran,47  a  Rhode  Island 
clergyman,  wiote:  I  have  seen  some  of  them  pace  a  Mile  in  little  more  than 
two  Minutes,  a  good  deal  less  than  three.  ’  After  the  Revolution,  the  pacers 
diminished  rapidly  in  numbers,  and  by  1800  the  breed  was  practically  extinct. 
They  had  been  exported  rapidly  to  the  West  Indies,  perhaps  faster  than 
they  were  raised.  The  pacers  were  used  exclusively  as  saddle  animals  and 
never  in  harness,  but  improvement  of  roads  and  the  increased  demand  for 
horses  for  teaming  in  the  Revolution  made  the  raising  of  trotting  horses  more 
profitable.48 


CONESTOGA  HORSES. 

The  Conestoga  horses,  “  the  finest  draft  animals  on  the  continent  in  the 
colonial  age,”  were  developed  by  the  German  farmers  of  Pennsylvania  from 
stock  originally  brought  over  by  English  settlers.  The  name  was  taken  from 

45  American  Museum,  VIII  (1790),  43.  On  the  relative  use  of  oxen  and  horses  see 
Belknap,  New  Hampshire,  III,  260;  Judd,  Hadley ,  367;  Gardiner,  in  N.  Y.  Hist. 
Soc.  Collections,  Publication  fund  series,  II,  256;  N.  Y.  Soc.  for  Promotion  of 
Useful  Arts  Transactions,  I  (2d  ed.,  1801),  31 ;  Franklin,  Writings,  VII,  434;  Good¬ 
rich,  Statistical  Account  of  Ridgefield,  Connecticut. 

40  Benedict  Arnold  was  engaged  in  this  trade.  See  Chastellux,  Travels,  166  and  note. 
Eliot,  Field  Husbandry,  16;  American  Husbandry,  I,  58. 

47  In  Updike,  Narragansett  Church,  III,  36;  Phillips/  Horse  Raising  in  Colonial  New 

England,  291  et  seq. 

48  Updike,  Narragansett  Church,  III,  37,  note;  Douglass,  British  Settlements,  II,  214; 

Phillips,  Horse  Raising  in  Colonial  New  England,  291  et  seq. 

9 


114 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


a  stream  in  Lancaster  county,  the  site  of  a  settlement  of  Swiss  Mennomtes. 
They  were  a  strong,  large,  breed,  whose  excellence  was  a  matter  of  frequent 
comment.  Rush43  wrote:  “A  German  horse  is  known  in  every  part  of^the 
state ;  indeed,  he  seems  to  ‘  feel  with  his  lord,  the  pleasure  and  the  pride  o 

his  extraordinary  size  or  fat.”  . 

Toward  the  end  of  the  century  there  occurred  two  events  of  first  class 

importance  in  the  history  of  American  horse-raising  the  importation  of  the 

thoroughbred  Messenger  from  England  to  Philadelphia  in  1788  and  the 

foaling  of  Justin  Morgan,  the  sire  of  the  Morgan  breed,  in  West  Spring  e  , 

Massachusetts,  in  1793.  The  improvement  of  American  stock  which  resulted 

belongs,  however,  to  the  next  period  of  our  history, _ _ 


49  In  Penn.  German  Soc.  Proceedings  and  Addresses ,  XIX,  60. 


Chapter  IX. — Farm  Management  and  Household 

Economy. 

ECONOMIC  CHARACTERISTICS  OF  COLONIAL  AGRICULTURE. 

Two  economic  characteristics  stand  out  prominently  in  colonial  agricul- 
tuie.  (i)  its  extensive  character,  that  is,  the  thinness  of  the  application  of 
labor  and  capital  on  a  large  extent  of  land,  and  (2)  its  self-sufficiency,  mean- 
ing  by  that  term  not  complete  isolation  from  commercial  relations,  "but  pro- 
duction,  as  a  rule,  for  home  consumption  rather  than  for  sale. 

Contemporary  observers  had  often  remarked  in  the  eighteenth  century 
that  farms  were  too  large.  General  Warren’s  comparison  1 2 *  of  English  and 
American  farming  laid  emphasis  on  the  small  amount  of  capital  employed 
in  this  country,  and  as  early  as  1760  the  author  of  the  appendix  to  Eliot’s 
Field  Husbandry  2  had  observed : 

(<I  take  leave  to  mention  an  Error,  which,  I  think,  many  Husbandmen  are  guilty  of; 
vis,  in  undertaking  to  open  too  large  Tracts  of  Land  at  once  for  Improvement;  by  which 
Means  the  Expence  of  inclosing,  of  perhaps  fifty  Acres,  amounts  to  a  large  Sum  of 
Money  and  Quantity  of  Labour,  which,  a  small  Part  of,  expended  on  five  Acres  well 
cultivated,  would  yield  a  much  larger  Profit;  for  it  is  not  the  Quantity,  but  Quality  of 
Land  which  must  fill  the  Farmers  Barn.” 

The  farmers  of  Pennsylvania,  too,  were  “  land  poor.”  The  author  of 
American  Husbandry  3  remarked  : 

It  is.  very  evident  that  this  must  necessarily  be  the  system  while  the  settlers  spend 
half  their  fortune  in  buying  the  land,  that  is,  in  paying  the  province  fees  for  it :  if  a 
man  has  an  hundred  pounds  in  his  pocket,  and  was  able  with  it  to  cultivate  properly 
forty  or  fifty  acres ;  and  he  takes  three  or  four  hundred,  which  in  patent  fees  costs  him 
half  his  fortune,  he  then  plainly  lessens  his  ability  to  cultivate,  while  his  cultivation  ought 
to  increase  greatly.” 

SIZE  OF  FARMS. 

The  typical  farm  in  New  England  in  this  period  ranged  from  100  to  200 
acres,  sometimes  including  as  much  as  300  acres  in  the  newer  sections  and  fall¬ 
ing  to  50  to  100  acres  in  more  intensively  cultivated  areas.4  The  conditions  in 
Chester  County  were  probably  fairly  typical  of  the  older  settlements  in  the 
Middle  Colonies.  There  the  tax  returns  5  for  1765  from  3,293  farms  show 
an  average  size  of  135  acres.  Even  within  this  county  there  was  a  consider¬ 
able  variation  in  farm  acreage.  In  the  five  towns  nearest  Philadelphia  196 
farms  averaged  only  114  acres  each,  whereas  in  five  towns  on  the  western 

1  Quoted  on  p.  85. 

2  P.  160. 

3 1, 373. 

4  Dickinson,  View  of  Massachusetts,  7;  Mass.  Soc.  for  Promoting  Agriculture,  Papers 

(1807),  p.  10. 

5  Chester  County  Tax  Lists,  in  Pennsylvania  Archives,  3d  series,  XI,  1-137. 


116 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


border  of  the  county  460  farms  had  an  average  acreage  of  156.  On  the  fron¬ 
tier,  where,  as  we  have  seen  there  was  much  land  speculation,  there  were 
large  holdings  which,  however,  were  generally  not  cultivated  as  farms.  The 
actual  farming  on  the  frontier  was,  as  a  rule,  on  a  small  scale.6  In  general, 
however,  the  larger  farms  were  to  be  found  in  the  back  country  and  the 
smaller  in  the  neighborhood  of  the  coast  towns. 

An  exception  to  this  rule  was  the  Narragansett  country,  now  Washington 
County,  Rhode  Island,  where  in  the  first  half  of  the  eighteenth  century  live¬ 
stock  raising  and  dairy  farming  had  been  developed  on  a  large  scale.  There 
the  uncertainty  of  land  titles,  owing  to  the  boundary  dispute  between  Con¬ 
necticut  and  Rhode  Island,  had  prevented  community  settlement.  A  few 
individuals  had  secured  extensive  grants  of  land  on  which  they  grazed  large 
herds  of  cattle  and  flocks  of  sheep.  Although  the  average  holding  was  possibly 
not  over  300  acres,  farms  ranging  from  that  figure  to  several  thousands  of 
acres  were  not  uncommon.7 


FARM  LABOR. 


The  contention  that  colonial  farms  were  too  large  was  based  not  merely 
on  the  consideration  of  acreage  but  on  acreage  in  relation  to  the  available 
supply  of  farm  labor  and  farm  equipment.  In  the  eighteenth  century,  as  in 
the  seventeenth,  the  northern  farmer  relied  chiefly  on  his  own  labor  and  that 
of  his  family.  The  cooperation  of  several  family  groups,  a  relic  of  pioneer 
days,  was  frequent  in  harvesting,  corn-husking,  barn-raising,  etc. 

In  New  England  only  men  as  a  rule  were  to  be  seen  in  the  fields,  the 
women  of  the  family  assisting  only  occasionally  in  harvest  time.  Women 
looked  after  the  dairy,  the  poultry,  and  the  kitchen  garden.  Among  the  Ger¬ 
man  settlers  in  New  York  and  Pennsylvania  the  women  not  infrequently 
worked  in  the  fields  along  with  their  husbands  or  brothers.  Dwight 8  records 
his  astonishment  at  first  observing  this  phenomenon  “  near  Hudson,  New 

York.” 

“Immediately  after  I  left  Hudson’s,  I  was  presented  with  a  prospect  entirely  novel 
to  me.  Ten  women,  of  German  extraction,  were  arranged  in  front  of  a  little  building, 
busily  employed  in  dressing  flax.  In  my  childhood  I  had  seen  women,  in  a  small  number 
of  instances,  busied  in  the  proper  labour  of  men;  particularly  in  raking  hay  immediately 
before  a  shower,  when  the  pressing  nature  of  the  case  demanded  extraordinary  exertions. 
Even  this  I  had  not  seen  for  thirty  years.  Women  in  New  England  are  employed  only 
in  and  about  the  house,  and  in  the  proper  business  of  the  sex.  I  do  not  know,  that  I 
was  ever  more  struck  with  the  strangeness  of  any  sight,  than  with  the  appearance,  and 
business,  of  these  German  females.” 

In  New  England  a  farmer  could  occasionally  employ  a  poorer  neighbor 
whose  small  farm  did  not  demand  all  his  time.  The  Scotch-Irish  immigration 
after  1720  increased  the  supply  of  labor,  but  as  in  the  seventeenth  century 
the  easy  accessibility  of  cheap  new  land  drew  away  the  landless  men,  both 
native  and  foreign,  and  prevented  the  formation  of  a  regularly  dependable 
group  of  farm  laborers.  Another  circumstance  which  kept  farm  labor  high 


6  Ballagh,  in  Am.  Hist.  Asso.  Report  (1897),  P-1^.  _ _  ,  DO„  TT  ...  ATnr 

7  Channing,  in  J.  H.  U.  Studies  in  Hist,  and  Pol.  Set.,  IV  (1886),  No.  3;  Updike,  Nar¬ 

ragansett  Church,  1, 215-217.  .  ..  , 

s  Travels  (1821  ed.),  Ill,  205.  See  also  Rush,  in  Penn.  German  Society,  Proceedings  and 
Addresses,  XIX,  66;  Davis,  Bucks  County,  Pennsylvania,  717. 


FARM  MANAGEMENT  AND  HOUSEHOLD  ECONOMY 


117 


in  New  England  was  the  competition  of  the  fisheries  and  shipping  with 
agriculture. 

THE  REDEMPTIONERS. 

In  the  Middle  Colonies  the  larger  influx  of  immigrants,  English,  Scotch- 
Irish,  and  Germans,  produced  the  class  of  redemptioners,  or  indentured 
servants,  who  were  used  extensively  as  farm  help.  Kalm  9  describes  them 
as  follows : 

“  These  new-comers  are  very  numerous  every  year :  there  are  old  and  young  ones, 
and  of  both  sexes;  some  of  them  have  fled  from  oppression,  under  which  they  supposed 
themselves  to  have  laboured.  Others  have  been  driven  from  their  country  by  persecution 
on  account  of  religion ;  but  most  of  them  are  poor,  and  have  not  money  enough  to  pay 
their  passage,  which  is  between  six  and  eight  pounds  sterling  for  each  person ;  therefore 
they  agree  with  the  captain  that  they  will  suffer  themselves  to  be  sold  for  a  few  years, 
on  their  arrival.  In  that  case  the  person  who  buys  them,  pays  the  freight  for  them,  but 
frequently  very  old  people  come  over,  who  cannot  pay  their  passage,  they  therefore 
sell  their  children,  so  that  they  serve  both  for  themselves  and  for  their  parents:  there 
are  likewise  some  who  pay  part  of  their  passage,  and  they  are  sold  only  for  a  short  time. 
From  these  circumstances  it  appears,  that  the  price  of  the  poor  foreigners  who  come 
over  to  North  America  is  not  equal,  and  that  some  of  them  serve  longer  than  others; 
when  their  time  is  expired,  they  get  a  new  suit  of  clothes  from  their  master,  and  some 
other  things:  he  is  likewise  obliged  to  feed  and  clothe  them  during  the  years  of  their 
servitude.  Many  of  the  Germans  who  come  hither,  bring  money  enough  with  them  to 
pay  their  passage,  but  rather  suffer  themselves  to  be  sold,  with  a  view  that  during  their 
servitude  they  may  get  some  knowledge  of  the  language  and  quality  of  the  country, 
and  the  like,  that  they  may  the  better  be  able  to  consider  what  they  shall  do  when  they 
have  got  their  liberty.  Such  servants  are  taken  preferable  to  all  others,  because  they 
are  not  so  dear;  for  to  buy  a  Negroe  or  black  slave,  requires  too  much  money  at  once; 
and  men  or  maids  who  get  yearly  wages,  are  likewise  too  dear ;  but  this  kind  of  servants 
may  be  got  for  half  the  money,  and  even  for  less;  for  they  commonly  pay  fourteen 
pounds,  Pennsylvania  currency,  for  a  person  who  is  to  serve  four  years,  and  so  on  in 
proportion.  Their  wages  therefore  are  not  above  three  pounds  Pennsylvania  currency 
per  annum.  This  kind  of  servants,  the  English  call  servings.  When  a  person  has  bought 
such  a  servant  for  a  certain  number  of  years,  and  has  an  intention  to  sell  him  again,  lie 
is  at  liberty  to  do  so;  but  he  is  obliged,  at  the  expiration  of  the  term  of  the  servitude 
to  provide  the  usual  suit  of  cloaths  for  the  servant,  unless  he  has  made  that  part  of  the 
bargain  with  the  purchaser.  The  English  and  Irish  commonly  sell  themselves  for  four 
years,  but  the  Germans  frequently  agree  with  the  captain  before  they  set  out,  to  pay 
him  a  certain  sum  of  money,  for  a  certain  number  of  persons ;  as  soon  as  they  arrive 
in  America,  they  go  about  and  try  to  get  a  man  who  will  pay  the  passage  for  them.  In 
return  they  give  according  to  the  circumstances  one,  or  several  of  their  children  to 
serve  a  certain  number  of  years,  at  last  they  make  their  bargain  with  the  highest 
bidder.” 


WAGES  OF  FARM  LABOR. 

Data  on  farm  wages  are  of  course  fragmentary.  The  most  complete 
figures  available  are  those  collected  by  Strickland,10  which  have  been  sum¬ 
marized  in  table  14. 

In  New  York  1  bushel  a  day  was  the  payment  for  cradling  wheat ;  in  New 
England  a  bushel  of  maize  was  given  for  a  day’s  work  at  harvest.  In  addi¬ 
tion  to  these  money  wages,  laborers  received  food  and  either  cider  or  rum  to 

9  Travels,  I,  388.  The  passage  in  American  Husbandry ,  I,  169,  appears  to  be  merely 

a  paraphrase  of  Kalm. 

10  Observations,  28. 


118 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


drink.  Richard  Peters  wrote  to  Washington 11  in  1792  of  wages  around 
Philadelphia  as  follows : 

“  Our  wages  for  hirelings,  by  the  day,  are  commonly  2s.  in  winter,  and  2s.  6d.  nine 
months  in  the  year,  for  common  days-work  on  a  farm,  and  every  thing  found,  as  to 
eating  and  drinking.  The  same  man  will  hire,  and  find  himself,  at  3s.  and  3s.  6d.  per 
day;  for  a  reaper  3s.  to  3s.  9d.  and  found  ;  and  the  same  for  cutting  grass ;  reaping,  by  the 
acre,  I  have  never  had  done  under  5s.  but  the  price  is  generally  7s.  6d.  the  labourers 

finding  themselves .  As  to  mowing,  or  what  we  call  cradling  grain,  we  pay  a 

man  5s.  to  6s.  per  day,  and  found;  and  the  days’s  work  about  the  same  with  Mr.  Young’s 
statement,  viz.  two  or  two  acres  and  a  half  per  day.  Mowing  per  acre  5s.  to  6s.  and  a 
pint  of  rum.  Labourers  find  themselves  food . 

“  The  yearly  hire  of  a  good  labourer  in  Pennsylvania  I  think  sixty  dollars,  or  22A  10s. 
currency,  and  found,  clothing  excepted.” 

Such  wages  were  regarded  as  abnormally  high  by  European  observers. 
The  author  of  American  Husbandry  12  remarked  that  in  buying  labor  “  one 
shilling  will  do  as  much  in  England  as  half  a  crown  in  New  England.” 
Wages  were  high  not  only  in  money  but  in  money’s  worth,  and  it  was  this 


Table  14. — Farm  wages  for  agricultural  labor. 


New  York. 

New 

England. 

New  Jersey 
and 

Pennsylvania. 

By  the  month : 

In  summer  .. 
In  winter  . . . 
By  the  day :  . . . . 
Foreman  . 

is.  5d . 

is.  id . 

2S . 

£14  per  year. 

2S . 

is.  3d . 

2s.  7d . 

£18  15s.  . . . 

2S. 

is.  9id. 

2S.  3d. 

£24 

circumstance  which  made  the  acquisition  of  an  independent  position  so 
easy.  In  Vermont,  wrote  Williams : 13 

“  in  agriculture,  the  laborer  can  procure  seventy  dollars  a  year  for  his  work ;  equal  in 
value  to  one  hundred  and  twenty  bushels  of  wheat.  In  the  busy  seasons  of  the  year, 
the  common  price  of  a  day’s  labor  is  half  a  dollar;  in  the  winter  not  more  than  half 
this  sum.  All  kinds  of  labor  are  in  the  usual  proportion  to  that  of  agriculture.  Of 
these  wages  it  will  take  twenty  dollars,  to  procure  comfortable  clothing;  the  remainder 
the  laborer  is  able  to  reserve  for  other  purposes.  Thus  by  laboring  for  another  for  two 
or  three  years,  the  laborer  becomes  independent,  and  works  afterwards  upon  his  own 
land  or  stock.” 

SLAVES  IN  NEW  ENGLAND. 

It  has  long  since  been  established  by  economic  historians  that  the  failure 
of  northern  farmers  to  utilize  negro  slaves  as  agricultural  laborers  rested 
upon  economic  and  not  on  moral  or  religious  grounds.  Experiments  with  negro 
and  Indian  slave-labor  were  made  in  the  first  settlements.  It  became  clear, 
however,  that  the  slave  system  would  not  yield  a  profit  where  general  agri¬ 
culture  was  pursued  simply  for  a  living,  or  for  a  narrowly  limited  market. 
However,  in  one  northern  county,  that  unique  region  of  large  dairy  and  sheep 
farms,  the  Narragansett  country  in  Rhode  Island,  the  negro  slave  was  an 
important  figure.  In  the  town  of  South  Kingston,  in  1730,  from  one-third 

11  Washington,  Letters  on  Agriculture  (Knight  ed.),  84. 

12  I,  73. 

13  Vermont,  II,  367. 


FARM  MANAGEMENT  AND  HOUSEHOLD  ECONOMY  119 


to  one-half  of  the  population  were  negroes  and  Indians.  In  1774  there  were 
3,761  slaves  in  Rhode  Island  in  a  total  population  of  about  60,000,  but  by 
1790  the  number  had  decreased  to  less  than  i,ooo.14  It  seems  doubtful 
whether  the  blacks  were  essential  to  the  successful  conduct  of  large-scale 
agriculture  in  the  Narragansett  country.  In  the  gay  and  luxurious  life  of 
the  planters  many  house-servants  were  necessary,  and  it  may  be  that  most 
of  the  slaves  were  thus  employed  rather  than  as  field  hands. 

LAND  UTILIZATION. 

From  the  scarcity  of  labor  in  comparison  to  the  cheapness  of  land  it 
resulted  naturally  that  only  small  parts  of  the  farms  were  actually  in  tillage 
and  that  the  cultivation  of  these  small  patches  of  plowed  land  was  superficial 
and  negligent.  The  true  explanation  of  the  well-recognized  facts  of  bad 
tillage  was  forcefully  presented  by  Washington  15  in  a  letter  to  Arthur  Young. 
He  wrote : 

“  An  English  farmer  must  entertain  a  contemptible  opinion  of  our  husbandry,  or  a 
horrid  idea  of  our  lands,  when  he  shall  be  informed  that  not  more  than  eight  or 
ten  bushels  of  wheat  is  the  yield  of  an  acre;  but  this  low  produce  may  be  ascribed,  and 
principally  too,  to  a  cause  which  I  do  not  find  touched  by  either  of  the  gentlemen  whose 
letters  are  sent  to  you,  namely,  that  the  aim  of  the  farmers  in  this  country,  if  they  can 
be  called  farmers,  is,  not  to  make  the  most  they  can  from  the  land,  which  is,  or  has 
been  cheap,  but  the  most  of  the  labour,  which  is  dear ;  the  consequence  of  which  has  been, 
much  ground  has  been  scratched  over  and  none  cultivated  or  improved  as  it  ought  to 
have  been :  whereas  a  farmer  in  England,  where  land  is  dear,  and  labour  cheap,  finds  it 
his  interest  to  improve  and  cultivate  highly,  that  he  may  reap  large  crops  from  a  small 
quantity  of  ground.” 

The  small  proportion  of  farm  land  under  tillage  in  the  older  parts  of 
New  England  is  shown  by  the  data  in  table  15,  taken  from  the  Massachusetts 
Valuation  Returns  16  of  1801 : 


Table  15. — Land  utilization,  six  counties  in  Massachusetts,  1801. 

[From  Massachusetts  valuation  returns.] 


County. 

Total  taxable. 

Tillage. 

English  up¬ 
land  mowing. 

Fresh  meadow 
and 

salt  marsh. 

Pasture. a 

Woodland  and 
waste. b 

Acres. 

P. 

ct. 

Acres. 

P. 

ct. 

Acres. 

P. 

ct. 

Acres. 

P. 

ct. 

Acres. 

P. 

ct. 

Acres. 

P. 

ct. 

Hampshire  . . 

920,647 

100 

59,080 

6.4 

46,941 

5-i 

32,211 

3-5 

156,120 

17.0 

626,295 

68.0 

Berkshire  . . . 

475  U47 

100 

28,320 

6.0 

28,558 

6.0 

10,717 

2.2 

86,827 

18.3 

320,725 

67-5 

W  orcester . .  . 

811,122 

100 

3L786 

3-9 

47,680 

5-9 

53,6ll 

6.6 

188,624 

23-3 

489,421 

60.3 

Middlesex. . . 

433,766 

100 

27,507 

6.3 

30,737 

7-i 

40,183 

9.3 

112,555 

25-9 

222,784 

51.4 

Norfolk . 

217,800 

100 

9,6l8 

4.4 

22,056 

10. 1 

19,312 

8.9 

56,640 

26.0 

110,174 

50.6 

Essex . 

24UI33 

100 

14,416 

6.0 

22,826 

9-5 

32,075 

13.3 

106,590 

44.2 

65,226 

27.0 

Summary.  . 

3,099,615 

100 

170,727 

5-5 

198,798 

6.4 

188,109 

6. 1 

707,356 

22.8 

1,834,625 

59.2 

a  Includes  “proprietor’s  commons,”  see  p.  55. 

b  Includes  unimproved  and  unimprovable  lands  as  well  as  town  commons. 


14  Updike,  Narragansett  Church,  I,  201-209;  Channing  in  J.  H.  U.  Studies  in  Hist,  and 

Pol.  Science,  TV  (1886),  No.  3,  p.  10. 

15  Letters  on  Agriculture  (Knight  ed.),  32. 

16  MSS.  in  Mass.  Archives,  Boston,  Mass. 


120 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


It  appears  from  the  tables  that  in  eastern  Massachusetts  a  hundred  acre 
farm  would  contain  from  4  to  6  acres  of  land  in  crops  and  in  addition  8  or 
10  acres  of  upland  grass  land  which  was  occasionally  ploughed.  About  the 
same  quantity  of  land  was  permanently  in  grass,  i.  e.,  in  natural  meadows. 


Table  16. — Land  utilization,  Connecticut,  1796. 

[From  MS.  tax  lists  in  comptroller’s  office,  Hartford,  Connecticut.] 


County. 

All  taxable 
land. 

Tillage. 

Upland  mow¬ 
ing  and  clear 
pasture. 

Meadow. b 

Brush 

pasture.® 

Uninclosed 

land. 

Acres. 

P. 

ct. 

of 

to¬ 

tal. 

Acres. 

P. 

ct.of 

to¬ 

tal. 

Acres. 

P. 

ct.of 

to¬ 

tal. 

Acres. 

P. 

ct.of 

to¬ 

tal. 

Acres. 

P. 

ct.of 

to¬ 

tal. 

Acres. 

P. 

ct.of 

to¬ 

tal. 

Hartford  .... 

303,737 

IOO 

53,888 

17.7 

54,680 

18.O 

12,130 

4.0 

79,538 

26.2 

103,504 

34-1 

New  Haven.. 

235,915 

100 

30,844 

i3-i 

61,363 

26.O 

20,073 

8.5 

79,377 

33-6 

44,260 

18.8 

New  London. 

246,526 

IOO 

21,403 

8-7 

66,717 

27.I 

10,592 

4-3 

97U55 

39-4 

5o,66i 

20.5 

Eairfield . 

23U473 

IOO 

50,243 

21.7 

43,699 

18.9 

23,677 

10.2 

66,116 

28.6 

47,740 

2  .6 

Windham. . . . 

288,886 

IOO 

25U39 

8.8 

55,630 

19-3 

24,285 

4.4 

84,732 

29-3 

99,101 

34-3 

Litchfield  .. . . 

283,011 

IOO 

45,645 

11. 9 

74,081 

19-3 

16,399 

8  •  4 

77.918 

20.3 

168,968 

44-1 

Middlesex  .. . 

140,875 

IOO 

13,020 

9-3 

35,233 

25.O 

8,034 

5-7 

47,660 

33-8 

36,929 

26.2 

Tolland . 

158,247 

IOO 

14,010 

8.9 

34,196 

21.6 

7,277 

4.6 

47,354 

29.9 

55,412 

35-0 

Summary11.. 

1,988,668 

100254,189 

12.8 

425,595 

21.4 

122,465 

6.2 

579,847 

29. 1 

606,573 

30.5 

a  Including  fractions  of  acres. 
b  Includes  all  other  mowing  land. 
c  Includes  boggy,  meadow,  not  mowed. 


The  remainder  of  the  farm,  70  or  80  acres,  was  divided  between  woodland 
and  pasture  in  proportions  determined  largely  by  physiographic  features. 
The  distinction  between  pasture  and  woodland  was  probably  not  of  great 
importance.  Cattle  and  swine,  as  we  know,  were  frequently  turned  loose  to 
pick  up  their  living  in  the  woods.  Moreover,  as  old  fields  were  exhausted 
they  were  allowed  to  grow  up  to  woods,  being  used  meanwhile  for  pasture. 
This  fact  is  clearly  brought  out  in  the  distinction  in  the  Connecticut  tax 
lists  between  “  clear  pasture  ”  and  “  brush  pasture.” 

In  Connecticut,  table  16  shows  unusually  large  proportions  of  plowing  land 
in  two  counties :  in  Hartford,  where  there  was  much  easily  tilled  sandy  loam 
in  the  river  valleys,  and  in  Fairfield,  where  the  accessibility  of  the  New  York 
and  West  India  markets  had  encouraged  vegetable-raising  and  flax-growing. 
In  this  State  the  percentage  of  land  unimproved,  i.  e.,  woodland  or  semi- 
wooded,  included  about  two-thirds  the  total  acreage. 

For  the  Middle  Atlantic  States  we  have  not  been  able  to  obtain  similarly 
detailed  statistics.  In  general,  it  seems  evident  that  on  account  of  the  greater 
importance  of  grain  cultivation  larger  percentages  of  farm  areas  were  de¬ 
voted  to  tillage.  In  the  fragmentary  data  which  Washington  gathered  about 
179°,  in  reply  to  Arthur  Young’s  inquiries,  we  find  a  report  from  Bucks 
County,  Pennsylvania,17  in  which  the  figures  of  table  17  are  given  as  typical 
of  that  region. 


FARM  MANAGEMENT  AND  HOUSEHOLD  ECONOMY  121 

Table  17. 


Acres. 

P.  Ct. 

Total  farm  acreage... 

Acres  in  tillage . 

100 

37-5 

Acres  in  pasture . 

75 

Acres  in  orchard,  garden,  etc 

50 

Tn 

25.0 

5-0 

7-5 

25.0 

Acres  in  meadow.... 

Acres  in  woodland... 

I5 

5° 

his  neighborhood,  about  6  miles  f  romPhiMe^a, 

Sn”n“3,:dar*b,e  '“d  "d  9  »"  “*"•  ““  '5  £ 

FARM  IMPROVEMENTS— INCLOSURES. 

The  problem  of  fencing  was  primarily  a  labor  problem.  In  the  early  set- 
ements  and  for  a  considerable  part  of  the  eighteenth  century  the  growing 
crops  were  guarded  from  livestock  by  the  practice  of  pasturage  in  common 
under  community  herdsmen.  But  as  settlement  became  denser  and  the  com- 
mon  fields  were  divided,  fences  became  indispensable.  In  New  England 

w5f  T  ,Were  USlLa”y  ind°Sed  dther  b?  PO^-and-rail  fences  or  by  stone 
walls  In  piling  up  these  monuments  of  back-breaking  toil  the  farmers  ac¬ 
complished  a  double  purpose,  at  the  same  time  setting  up  a  protection  for 

r  J  Cr°P.^  and.  nddmg  fields  of  a  hindrance  to  cultivation.  In  the  Middle 
Co  omes  the  distinctive  form  of  inclosure  was  the  worm  fence  composed  of 
rails  of  chestnut  or  oak.  The  worm  fence  was  a  labor-saving  deviceP  but  its 
pentme  windings  consumed  extravagant  quantities  of  timber  so  that  in  the 

SS5&  *'•"  fence,  or  privel  Z£,  w £ 


FARM  BUILDINGS. 

The  log  huts  of  the  first  settlers  disappeared  from  the  older  communities 
during  the  eighteenth  century.  In  New  England  they  were  superseded  first 
I?'  framed  houses,  wooden  buildings  of  one  story,  measuring 
about  1 6  by  24  feet  on  the  ground  and  containing  from  one  to  three  rooms 
better  class  of  houses,  erected  only  by  the  more  prosperous  farmers,  were 

n  'VOf  fr0nh  sI°plng  down  to  one  story  in  the  rear.  The  main 

pa  t  of  the  house  would  measure,  perhaps,  40  by  20  feet,  and  the  rear  ell 

which  was  used  for  a  kitchen,  20  by  20.  Enormous  chimneys  of  brick  and 
stone  extended  through  the  house,  furnishing  flues  for  the  open  fireplaces 

siv  bmlt  t  .  f6  y  W(T  °f  hefting  and  C00king'  Sucb  houses  were 
solidly  built,  with  frames  of  heavy  oak  timbers,  some  of  them  18  inches  in 

diameter.  The  sides  had  a  double  sheathing,  rough  boarding  covered  wi* 

is  on  Agriculture  (Knight  ed.),  72. 

18  Ibid.,  81. 

"o&T’edSTl.Vs,  37S65’  U’  53‘56 1  AmeHcan  Husbandry,  I,  74,  167;  Dwight,  Travels 


122 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


thin  lapped  clapboards.  The  roofs  were  of  long  rent  shingles  fastened  with 

'^The'tean-to  kitchen  often  connected  with  the  barn  by  a  long  woodshed, 
where  the  huge  piles  of  logs  were  stored  for  winter  consumption.  The  barn 
proper  was  sometimes  placed  at  right  angles  with  the  house  and  shed  to 
afford  a  sheltered  space  for  a  barn-yard.  It  was  built  of  heavy  timber  cov¬ 
ered  with  wide  pine  boards.  An  open  space  in  the  center  provided  a  driveway 
as  well  as  a  threshing-floor. 

“On  one  side  of  the  threshing  floor  of  the  barn  were  the  stables  for  the :  horses  and 
cattle  and  upon  the  other  the  great  haymow.  On  the  scaffold  over  the  stables  the  horse 
hay  ’was  garnered,  and  upon  the  ‘  little  scaffold’  over  the  far  end  of  the  barn  floor  Were 
nicely  piled  the  bound  sheaves  of  wheat,  rye  or  barley,  the  butts  all  placed  outward 
to  hinder  the  entrance  of  the  mice.  Over  the  great  beams  were  scaffolds  made  of 
round  poles  and  pieces  of  waste  lumber,  generally,  in  such  condition  as  to 
class  man  trap.  On  this  scaffold  was  heaped  the  crop  of  oats,  all  awaiting  the  thrash'ng 
by  the  hand  flail,  the  use  of  which  generally  began  about  Thanksgiving  time.  Who, 
raised  on  a  farm,  does  not  remember  the  miseries  of  the  boy  who  mowed  away  the  y, 
about  the  time  the  mow  hole  was  filled  and  pitching  over  the  great  beams  commenced. 
The  hot  hole  of  Calcutta  was  no  comparison  to  it.”  21 

FARM  BUILDINGS  OF  GERMAN  SETTLERS  IN  PENNSYLVANIA. 

In  the  Middle  Colonies  farm  buildings  of  brick  and  stone  were  more  fre¬ 
quently  seen  than  in  New  England.  Among  the  German  settlers  of  Pennsyl¬ 
vania  farm  buildings  were  particularly  commodious  and  substantial.  In  the 
second  generation  they  usually  abandoned  their  log  huts  and  moved  into  two- 
story  stone  houses.  The  latter  had  pitched  roofs  with  cornices  running 
across  the  gables  and  around  the  first  story. 

“  Many  of  them  were  imposing  structures,  having  arched  cellars  underneath,  spacious 
hallways,  with  easy  stairs,  open  fireplaces  in  most  of  the  rooms,  oak-paneled  partitions, 

and  windows  hung  in  weights  ”  22 

The  German  settlers  used  large  close  stoves  for  heating  instead  of  fire¬ 
places,  thus  economizing  fuel  and  increasing  comfort.  The  original . barns 
and  stables  of  rough  logs  were  early  replaced  by  stone  structures  in  the 
German  settlements ;  in  other  localities  they  persisted  until  the  end  of  the 
eighteenth  century.  The  so-called  Swisser  barns  introduced  by  the  Germans 
were  soon  adopted  as  models  by  the  English  and  Scotch-Irish  farmers  and 
became  a  familiar  feature  of  the  landscape  in  southeastern  Pennsylvania. 

Bordley  23  wrote : 

“  Farmers  in  Pennsylvania  have  a  commendable  spirit  for  building  good  barns,  which 
are  mostly  of  stone.  On  the  ground  floor  are  stalls  in  which  them  horses  and  oxen  are 
fed  with  hay,  cut-straw,  and  rye-meal;  but  not  always  their  other  beasts.  Roots  ar 
seldom  given  to  their  live-stock,  being  too  little  thought  of.  The  second  floor  with 

20  Nourse,  Harvard,  Massachusetts,  7C-100;  Davis,  Wallingford,  Connecticut,  406; 

2iThomp°so 963-  See  also  Walker,  House  and  Farm  of 

the  First  Minister  of  Concord ,  New  Hampshire,  1 7- 

22  Ellis  and  Evans,  Lancaster  County,  Pennsylvania,.  349-  .  .  ,  . 

23  Notes  and  Essays  134;  see  also  Scot,  Geographical  Description  of  Pennsylvania,  24, 
'  Ellis  and  Evans’ Lancaster  County,  Pennsylvania,  348;  Buck,  Bucks 

vania  35*  Rush  in  Penn.  German  Society,  Proceedings  and  Addresses,  XIX,  54,  02, 
Acrelius,’ in  Penn.  Hist.  Soc.  Memoirs,  XI,  156;  Kalm,  Travels,  I,  223,  II,  wS. 

275,  285, 


FARM  MANAGEMENT  AND  HOUSEHOLD  ECONOMY  123 
the  ro°f,  contains  their  sheaves  of  grain,  which  are  thrashed  on  this  floor  A  part  of 

WTO'S  ?£££?&£&■  -  "a 

within  the  house,  it  is  built  thirty-six  to  fortv  f  \  -a  S1Vm?  f00™  to  turn  waSgons 
may  be  requisite  ’to  the  desU  or  size  of  t  °  farm  ‘he  length  is  given  that 

Of  sheds  tacked  to  their  modern  barns  Their  ^  '  i  l  arG  "0t  many  lnstances 

admit  of  them*  and  room  is  P-ainerl  h  n  i  •  e,°  building,  of  late,  does  not  well 

stories,  having 'deep  sides  or  Ditch  Th^  linder  one  roof>  covering  one  or  more 

no  more  to  JverXet  *  C°S‘‘y  ^  °f  but  *  «»* 

the  next  thirteen  feet  *  th  bottom  to  top.  The  ground  story  seven  or  eight  feet  high; 

pitche^up^and^ere^thrashed'out.”  S°  ^  “t0  WWch  in  the  * 

TOOLS  AND  IMPLEMENTS. 

Littlt;  it  any  improvement  had  been  made  in  farm  implements  until  the 
very  close  of  the  eighteenth  century.  The  woodwork  of  the  carts  ploughs 
yokes,  and  other  farm  implements  was  usually  made  at  home.  The  fron 

£  ’  C^nS’  aXeS/  bil1  h00ks'  scythes-  as  as  blades  of  the 

die  vilL  rnf  °  ,  °rks  and  Pitchforks>  were  hammered  out  by 

the  village  blacksmiths.  Shovels  were  made  of  wood  with  the  edge  shod  with 

iron.  In  general,  such  tools  were  heavy,  clumsy  and  ill-contrived  for  their 

purposes.  The  two-wheeled  cart  was  still  the  chief  means  of  summer  trans- 

r°n  e/arm’  and  tHe  S!ed  m  Wlnter-  In  Pennsylvania  much  teaming  was 
done  w  h  heavy  wagons,  but  in  New  England  four-wheeled  vehicles^vere 
practically  unknown  before  the  Revolution.24 

PLOWS. 

For  the  important  business  of  plowing  the  eighteenth  century  farmers 

were  but  poorly  equipped.  An  implement  extensively  used  was  the  Carev 
plow,  which  has  been  described  as  follows  : 25  * 

“  The  land-side  and  the  standard  were  made  of  wood,  and  it  had  a  wooden  mould 
board,  often  roughly  plated  over  with  pieces  of  old  saw-plate,  tin,  or  sheet-iron.  It  had 
a  clumsy  wrought-iron  share,  while  the  handles  were  upright  held  in  place  bv  two 
wooden  Pins.  It  took  a  strong  man  to  hold  it,  and  about^o^ble  the  strength  of  t  am 

nT/r'an  f0  Vhf  Same  am0Unt  0f  work-  The  ‘bar-share  plough/  sometimes 
called  the  bull  plough,  was  also  used,  a  flat  bar  forming  the  land-side  with  an  im¬ 
mense  clump  of  iron,  shaped  like  half  a  lajice-head,  into  the  upper  part  of' which  a  kind 
of  colter  was  fastened,  which  served  as  a  point.  It  had  a  wooden  mould-board  fitted  to 
the  iron-work  in  the  most  bungling  manner.  A  sharp-pointed  shovel,  held  with  the 
everse  side  up  and  drawn  forward  with  the  point  in  the  ground,  would  give  an  idea 

snnfH  WOrk’i  lhen  there  WuS  t1he  ‘shovel  pl°ugh/  in  very  general  use  in  theg middle  and 
uthern  colonies;  a  roughly-hewn  stick  was  used  for  a  beam,  and  into  this  another 

stick  was  framed  upon  the  end  of  which  there  was  a  piece  of  iron,  shaped  a  little  like 
b/am  ”>’P01nted  Sh°Ve  '  ^  tW°  r°Ugh  hand'eS  Were  nailed  or  pinned  t0  ‘he  sides  of  the 


124  AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 

The  wooden  plows  were  not  heavy,  but  the  friction  was  nevertheless 
excessive  and  the  drawbar  pull  was  correspondingly  great.  1  he  iron  plating 
was  rough  and  uneven,  and  a  still  greater  defect  was  poor  design. 

"The  share  and  mould-board  were  so  attached  as  to  make  too  blunt  a  "'edge  Its 
action  was  not  uniform,  and  it  was  difficult  to  hold,  requiring  constant  watchfulness 
and  great  strength  to  prevent  it  from  being  thrown  out  of  the  ground.  To  plough  to 
any  considerable  depth  it  was  necessary  to  have  a  man  at  the  beam  to  bear  down.  . 

With  such  unwieldly  instruments,  two  men  or  a  man  and  a  boy,  using  2 
or  t  horses  or  4  or  6  oxen,  could  scratch  over  1  or  2  acres  a  day.  Lighter 
plows  of  the  same  general  design  as  those  already  described  were  sometimes 
used  for  cultivating  between  the  rows  of  Indian  corn.-  The  experiments 
with  improved  forms  of  mold-boards  and  with  cast-iron  shares  which  were 


Fig.  — Colonial  plow  with  wooden  moldboard. 

TViiq  nlow  now  preserved  in  the  National  Museum,  Washington,  D  C.,  was  used 
by  Henry  Lamprey,  who  settled  in  Kensington,  New  Hampshire,  in  1732.  Note  the  s  rip 
of  iron  plating  on  the  moldboard  and  the  iron  share  and  colter. 

in  progress  at  the  very  end  of  the  century  yielded  tangible  results  in  the  early 
decades  of  the  next  century.28 


HARROWS. 


Besides  the  plow,  the  harrow  was  practically  the  only  implement  to  which 
animal  power  was  applied.  Harrows  with  wooden  or  iron  teeth  were  used  for 
pulverizing  and  leveling  ploughed  land,  for  covering  seed,  and  for  weeding 
between  the  rows  of  Indian  corn.  Acrelius  29  wrote : 

“The  harrow  is  three-cornered  and  heavy.  The  traces  are  fastened  to  it  with  a  link, 
which  makes  a  convenience  in  turning.  A  pair  of  horses  before  the  harrow,  and  a 


26  Flint,  in  Maine  Board  of  Agric.,  19th  Annual  Report  (1874),  pp.  hi,  119. 

27  On  plows  and  plowing  see  Chase,  Old  Chester,  N._ H.,  426;  Acrelius,  m  Pe  .  • 

Soc  Memoirs .  XI,  147;  Roberts,  Fertility,  44;  Deane,  New  England  farmer  (2d 


28  NC<^Y.  for  Promotion  of  Useful  Arts,  Transactions,  I  (2d  ed.,  1801),  i73> 

Bordley,  Essays  and  Notes,  471- 

29  Penn.  Hist.  Soc.  Memoirs,  XI,  148. 


FARM  MANAGEMENT  AND  HOUSEHOLD  ECONOMY  125 


boy  on  the  horse’s  back,  smooths  the  field  into  fine  and  even  pieces  without  any  great 
trouble.  Sometimes  two  harrows  are  fastened  together  after  the  same  team.” 

In  New  England,  according  to  Deane  30  two  kinds  of  harrows  were  used, 
square  and  triangular,  or  “  bifurcate,”  the  former  for  old  and  clear  grounds 
and  the  latter  where  stumps  and  other  obstacles  were  numerous. 

“  The  square  harrow  is  armed  with  sixteen,  or  with  twenty  five  tushes,  or  teeth.  The 
sharper  these  teeth  are,  the  more  they  will  pulverize  the  soil.  If  they  be  steeled  at  the 
points,  they  will  hold  their  sharpness  the  longer,  and  stir  the  ground  more  effectually. 
And  the  cost  of  doing  it  is  so  little,  that  it  is  surprising  to  see  that  it  is  so  generally 
neglected  by  our  farmers . 

“  Some  use  harrows  with  wooden  teeth,  but  they  are  of  so  little  advantage  to  the 
land,  unless  it  be  merely  for  covering  seeds,  that  they  may  be  considered  as  unfit  to  be 
used  at  all.  The  treading  of  the  cattle  that  draw  them,  will  harden  the  soil  more, 
perhaps,  than  these  harrows  will  soften  it.” 


HARVESTING,  THRESHING  AND  CLEANING  GRAIN. 

The  methods  employed  and  the  implements  used  in  harvesting,  threshing, 
and  cleaning  grain  were  but  little  advanced  over  those  of  the  ancient  Israel¬ 
ites.  Wheat,  and  sometimes  other  small  grains,  was  still  reaped  with  a  sickle. 
(See  Fig.  4.)  Grass  and  occasionally  grain  as  well  was  cut  with  a  scythe. 
An  important  innovation  in  the  Middle  Colonies  in  the  latter  part  of  the 
century  which  was  not  known  in  New  England  until  after  1800,  was  the 
grain  cradle. 

“  This  consisted  of  a  broad  scythe,  with  a  light  frame  of  four  wooden  fingers  attached 
corresponding  in  shape  and  nearly  of  the  same  length.  With  this  the  grain  could  be 
cut  and  at  the  same  time  gathered,  and  by  a  dexterous  turn  to  the  left  the  reaper  could 
throw  it  in  a  swath,  ready  to  be  raked  and  bound  into  sheaves.”  31 

With  such  primitive  tools  harvesting  was  a  slow  business.  Richard  Peters 
estimated  that  a  reaper  or  mower  would  not  average  more  than  three-fourths 


30  New  England  Farmer  (2d  ed.,  1797),  p.  142. 

31  Eby,  in  Ellis  and  Evans,  Lancaster  County,  Pennsylvania,  349. 


126 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


of  an  acre  a  day  and  in  heavy  grain  or  grass  not  more  than  half  an  acre.  In^ 
cradling  grain  2  or  2 \  acres  was  considered  a  day’s  work.32  Tilton  33  wrote: 

“  A  man  can  cut  an  acre  of  wheat  with  a  sickle  in  a  day ;  cradle  four  times  as  much 
V*  oats  or  barley ;  and  mow  an  acre  of  green  grass  with  a  naked  scythe.” 

In  New  England  grain  was  usually  threshed  with  the  flail ;  in  the  Middle 
Colonies  the  flail  was  used  to  some  extent,  but  the  more  general  practice 
was  to  tread  out  the  grain  with  horses. 

“  ‘  They  hauled  their  grain  on  sleds  to  the  stacks,  where  a  temporary  threshing  floor 
was  erected.’  On  these  floors  the  grain  was  thrashed  out  by  horses,  which  were  driven 
in  a  circle,  and  after  the  heads  were  deemed  to  have  been  well  cleared  of  the  seed  the 
straw  was  thrown  to  one  side  with  forks  and  the  grain  swept  up,  ready  for  another 
lot  of  bundles  to  be  unbound  and  submitted  to  a  like  process.  In  the  barns,  however, 
the  thrashing  was  usually  done  with  the  flail,  and  on  a  still  day  the  sound  of  the  heavy 
thump  of  the  oaken  breaker  on  the  floor,  which  acted  like  a  drum,  could  be  heard  a 
long  way  off.”  34 

The  threshing  of  barley  with  horses  was  an  innovation  in  Rhode  Island 
at  the  end  of  the  century. 

“When  a  barley  heap  is  to  be  thrashed,  previous  care  is  taken  to  have  it  placed  on  a 
hard  and  level  plat.  A  quantity  of  barley  in  the  sheaf  is  then  laid  in  a  circular  train 
to  be  trampled  upon  by  horses.  Sometimes  three  or  four  horses  are  ridden  round  upon 
the  barley  by  boys;  at  other  times  a  man  stands  in  the  centre  of  the  circle,  and  with 
the  reins  in  one  hand,  and  a  whip  in  the  other,  drives  two  or  three  pairs  of  young  horses 
round  upon  the  barley;  whilst  another  person  is  employed  with  a  rake  to  turn  the 
barley,  and  expose  it  properly  to  the  action  of  the  horses’  feet.  When  the  grain  of  one 
layer  is  thus  thoroughly  beaten  from  the  straw,  the  latter  is  raked  into  an  heap  without 
the  circle,  and  the  former  into  an  heap  within.  Another  layer  of  barley  forms  a  new 
sheet  for  the  horses,  and  the  driver  on  the  heap  of  grain  recommences  the  operation 
of  driving  them  round.  This  manner  of  thrashing  has  been  practised  in  this  town  four 
or  five  years,  and  succeeds  so  well,  as  to  render  the  flail  almost  useless.  In  this  way 
the  grain  is  both  effectually  separated  from  the  straw,  and  separated  more  expeditiously 
and  cheaply  than  by  the  method  ordinarily  used  in  Massachusetts.  Two  men  and  six 
horses  will  thrash  an  hundred  bushels  of  barley  in  one  day.”  35 

Winnowing  was  performed  by  throwing  the  grain  against  the  wind  and 
running  it  through  sieves.  In  some  places  large  willow  winnowing-fans  were 
used.  Experiments  with  horsepower  threshing  machines  had  begun  about 
1780,  but  practicable  development  and  introduction  of  such  devices  did  not 
result  until  considerably  later.36 

SELF-SUFFICIENT  FARMING. 

Self-sufficiency  was  a  striking  and  important  characteristic  of  the  colonial 
farm.  The  farm  family  produced  for  themselves  food,  clothing,  house  fur¬ 
nishings,  farm  implements,  in  fact  practically  everything  they  needed. 

“  From  his  feet  to  his  head  the  farmer  stood  in  vestment  produced  on  his  own 
farm.  The  leather  of  his  shoes  came  from  the  hides  of  his  own  cattle.  The  linen  and 
woolen  that  he  wore  were  products  that  he  raised.  The  farmer’s  wife  or  daughter  braided 
and  sewed  the  straw  hat  on  his  head.  His  fur  cap  was  made  from  the  skin  of  a  fox  he 
shot.  The  feathers  of  wild  fowl  in  the  bed  whereon  he  rested  his  weary  frame  by  night, 


32  In  Washington’s  Letters  on  Agriculture  (Knight  ed.),  84. 

33  In  American  Museum ,  V,  380. 

34  Ashmead,  Delaware  County,  Pennsylvania,  208. 

35  Notes  on  Compton,  R.  I.  (1803),  in  Mass.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  1st  series,  IX,  200. 

36  Bordley,  Essays  and  Notes,  51 1. 


FARM  MANAGEMENT  AND  HOUSEHOLD  ECONOMY  127 

were  the  results  acquired  in  his  shooting.  The  pillow-cases,  sheets  and  blankets,  the 
comfortables,  quilts  and  counterpanes,  the  towels  and  table  cloth,  were  home  made. 
His  harness  and  lines  he  cut  from  hides  grown  on  his  farm.  Everything  about  his  ox 
yoke  except  staple  and  ring  he  made.  Ilis  whip,  his  ox  gad,  his  flail,  axe,  hoe  and  fork- 
handle,  were  his  own  work.  How  little  he  bought,  and  how  much  he  contrived  to  supply 
his  wants  by  home  manufacture  would  astonish  this  generation.”  37 

Under  a  system  of  mixed  husbandry  one  would  naturally  expect  the  farm 
to  produce  its  own  food-supply,  but  the  extent  to  which  this  rule  was  carried 
is  surprising.  Nourse38  wrote: 

‘  The.  ordinary  food  of  the  farmer’s  family,  though  abundant,  was  of  the  simplest, 
demanding  the  sauce  of  good  appetite  and  sound  digestive  powers.  Tables  ‘groaned,’  but 
chiefly  under  the  weight  of  ‘  bean  porridge  hot  and  bean  porridge  cold,’  brown  bread, 
hominy  or  hasty-pudding  and  milk,  pork,  salt  beef  boiled,  salt  and  fresh  fish,  succotash 
and  the  commonest  vegetables  in  their  season.  Molasses  and  honey  sufficed  for  sweet¬ 
ening,  sugar  being  costly,  and  rarely  used  except  in  sickness  or  in  entertaining  guests. 
The  top  shelf  at  the  village  store  held  a  row  of  white  cones  wrapped  in  purple  paper. 
One  of  these  loaves,’  weighing  eight  or  ten  pounds,  wras  about  a  year’s  supply  of  sugar 
to  the  ordinary  family.  The  paper  wrap  was  carefully  saved  and  utilized  in  the 
dyeing  of  yarn.” 

The  beef  and  pork  were  supplied  by  the  farm  animals  slaughtered,  usually 
by  the  farmer  himself,  and  dried,  salted  or  pickled  by  the  farm  women.  The 
latter  also  made  butter,  cheese,  and  lard.  Bread  was  the  product  of  the 
farmer  s  own  grains,  ground  at  the  local  grist  mill  and  baked  in  his  own  ovens. 

I\ot  only  the  staples  of  diet,  but  many  of  the  condiments  which  made  it 
palatable,  were  supplied  from  the  farm.  The  making  of  maple  sugar  and  sirup 
was  a  part  of  the  routine  of  inland  farms,  the  sugaring-off  time  coming  con¬ 
veniently  at  the  end  of  winter,  when  other  outdoor  operations  were  at  a 
standstill.  Honey  was  another  substitute  for  cane  sugar,  bees  being  con¬ 
sidered  an  important  adjunct  of  every  well-managed  farm.  Practically  the 
only  articles  on  the  farmers’  tables  which  were  not  “  home  made  ”  were  salt, 
molasses,  rum,  tea,  and  coffee.  Salt  was  of  course  indispensable,  and  rum 
was  a  beverage  rivaling  cider  in  its  popularity.  Hence  these  two  were  im¬ 
portant  articles  in  internal  trade.  Tea,  coffee  and  chocolate,  being  of  recent 
introduction,  were  not  generally  used  by  farmers  until  after  the  Revolution. 
Toward  the  end  of  the  century  their  use  was  rapidly  increasing.39 

THE  HOUSEHOLD  TEXTILE  INDUSTRY. 

In  the  matter  of  clothing  the  colonial  farm  was  quite  as  self-sufficient  as 
in  diet.  The  age  of  homespun  is  a  title  very  appropriately  applied  to  this 
period  to  indicate  the  importance  of  the  domestic  textiles  in  rural  economy. 
Throughout  the  eighteenth  century  it  is  the  practically  unanimous  testimony 
of  official  and  unofficial  sources  that  the  country  people  were  clad  in  mate¬ 
rials  of  their  own  “  manufacture.”  40 

37  Hedges,  in  Suffolk  County,  N.  Y.,  Bicentennial,  42. 

38  Harvard,  Massachusetts,  100;  see  also  Draper,  Spencer,  Massachusetts,  74;  Tilton,  in 

American  Museum,  V,  382;  Hedges,  in  Suffolk  County,  N.  Y.,  Bicentennial,  43. 

39  Felt,  Ipswich,  Massachusetts,  28;  Acrelius,  in  Penn.  Hist.  Soc.  Memoirs,  XI,  158; 

Dwight,  Travels,  IV,  353  (1821  ed.)  ;  Mass.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  1st  series, 

III,  13. 

40  O’Callaghan,  Doc.  Hist,  of  N.  Y .,  I,  734;  Connecticut  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  V,  445; 

Acrelius,  in  Penn.  Hist.  Soc.  Memoirs,  XI,  157;  Rush  in  Penn.  German  Soc.  Pro¬ 
ceedings  and  Addresses,  XIX,  64;  Morse,  American  Geography,  3d  ed.,  1792,  p.  216. 


128 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


The  abundance  and  variety  of  homespun  materials  appears  from  Hamil¬ 
ton’s  description.41  He  wrote  in  1790: 

“  Great  quantities  of  coarse  cloths,  coatings,  serges,  and  flannels,  linsey  woolseys, 
hosiery  of  wool,  cotton,  and  thread,  coarse  fustians,  jeans,  and  muslins,  checked  and 
striped  cotton  and  linen  goods,  bed  ticks,  coverlets  and  counterpaines,  tow  linens,  coarse 
shirtings,  sheetings,  towelling  and  table  linen,  and  various  mixtures  of  woolen  and 
cotton,  and  of  cotton  and  flax,  are  made  in  the  household  way,  and,  in  many  instances, 
to  an  extent  not  only  sufficient  for  the  supply  of  the  families  in  which  they  are  ma.de, 
but  for  sale,  and  even,  in  some  cases,  for  exportation.  It  is  computed  in  some  districts 
that  two-thirds,  three-fourths,  and  even  four-fifths  of  all  the  clothing  of  the  inhabitants, 
are  made  by  themselves.” 

If  we  could  have  examined  the  wardrobes  of  the  farm  men  and  women 
piece  by  piece,  we  should  have  found  everything  of  household  manufacture, 
except  a  few  bits  of  Sunday  finery,  hard-earned  and  long-treasured,  a  broad¬ 
cloth  coat,  a  beaver  hat,  shoe-buckles,  a  silk  gown,  or  a  few  ribbons.42 

THE  ORGANIZATION  OF  THE  HOUSEHOLD  INDUSTRIES. 

The  production  in  the  household  of  woolen  and  linen,  and  to  some  extent 
also  cotton  fabrics,  not  only  clothing  but  also  the  necessary  house  furnish¬ 
ings,  such  as  sheeting,  toweling,  blankets,  and  table  linen,  and  even  such 
coarse  fabrics  as  rag  carpets  and  grain  bags,  was  a  well-organized  industry. 
The  various  successive  stages  in  the  conversion  of  the  raw  materials  into 
the  finished  product  were  regularly  assigned  to  members  of  the  family 
according  to  their  strength  and  skill.  Thus  the  men  sheared  and  washed  the 
wool,  and  performed  most  of  the  laborious  processes  of  breaking,  swingling, 
and  hackling  the  flax  to  prepare  the  fiber  for  spinning.  The  carding  of  the 
wool,  corresponding  in  a  way  to  these  processes,  was  for  years  the  task 
assigned  to  the  older  members  of  the  family  whose  strength  and  eyesight 
would  have  been  unequal  to  more  onerous  or  more  careful  work.  About  the 
year  1800,  however,  the  household  was  relieved  of  this  task  by  the  intro¬ 
duction  of  the  water-power  carding  machines,  which,  spread  so  rapidly  that 
they  were  to  be  found  in  almost  every  village  in  1810.  The  younger  women 
of  the  family  spun  the  fibers  thus  prepared  into  yarn  and  thread  on  the  large 
and  small  wheels  then  found  in  every  farmhouse.  Bleaching  and  dyeing 
were  also  a  part  of  the  multifarious  activities  of  these  women.  In  the  latter 
process  almost  all  the  materials  used,  such  as  pokeberries,  madder,  goldenrod, 
the  bark  of  the  hickory,  butternut,  and  sassafras  trees,  and  various  flowers, 
could  be  found  in  the  woods  and  fields.  For  producing  the  deep  blue  which 
was  so  popular,  indigo  must  be  imported,  and  this  was  one  of  the  few  stand¬ 
ard  commodities  sold  at  the  stores  and  by  itinerant  peddlers.  Weaving  on 
the  ponderous  and  noisy  handlooms  was  to  some  extent  a  specialized  occupa¬ 
tion  performed  by  itinerant  weavers. 

On  small  looms  the  farm  women  made  garters,  points,  glove-ties,  hair- 
laces,  stay-laces,  shoe-strings,  hat-bands,  belts,  and  breeches-suspenders,  often 
called  “  galluses.”  The  production  of  these  odds  and  ends  of  apparel  shows 

41  Report  on  Manufactures,  in  American  State  Papers,  Finance,  I,  132. 

42  For  a  detailed  account  by  a  contemporary  observer  of  the  dress  of  the  farm  people 

in  New  England,  see  the  letter  of  Governor  Treadwell  of  Connecticut,  in  Noah 
Porter’s  Historical  Discourse,  82. 


FARM  MANAGEMENT  AND  HOUSEHOLD  ECONOMY  129 

in  a  striking  manner  the  extent  to  which  the  household  was  self-sufficient 
in  its  supply  ot  clothing.  Knitting  was  an  important  branch  of  the  domestic 
textile  industry  producing  the  hosiery,  mittens,  shawls,  comforters,  etc.,  for 
all  the  family.  It  must  be  remembered  that  the  foregoing  discussion  applies 
onl)  to  the  conditions  prevailing  in  inland  towns.  In  the  seaports  and  larger 

river  towns  the  inhabitants  had  long  used  clothing  and  household  furniture&of 
foreign  manufacture. 

CONSTRUCTION  AND  FURNISHING  OF  FARMHOUSES 

In  the  construction  and  furnishing  of  their  homes  the  inland  farmers 
relied  to  a  very  limited  extent  on  exchange  with  the  world  outside  their 
immediate  vicinity  and  in  fact  supplied  their  wants,  as  in  the  matter  of 
food  and  clothing,  largely  by  the  exertions  of  their  own  families.  They  util¬ 
ized  the  timber  growing  in  the  vicinity,  often  on  their  own  land,  and  employed 
as  workmen  those  of  their  neighbors  who  carried  on  the  carpenter’s  trade  as 

f  A'U'U  °f  The  task  of  raising  the  heavy  beams  which  consti¬ 

tuted  the  frame  of  the  structure  into  position  was  accomplished  by  the  united 

efforts  of  a  large  number  of  neighbors.  Only  a  small  amount  of  hardware 

was  used  and  most  of  this,  such  as  bolts  and  hinges,  was  made  by  the  local 

blacksmith.  The  nails,  which  were  used  much  more  sparingly  than  now,  were 

often  made  by  farmers  themselves  from  nail  rods  purchased  either  from  the 

local  store  or  from  a  near-by  slitting-mill.  Glass,  which  had  probably  in  all 

except  the  newest  settlements  replaced  the  wooden  shutters  and  oiled  paper 

of  earlier  times,  was  practically  the  only  material  brought  from  any  distance. 

The  furniture  such  as  bedsteads,  chairs,  settles,  and  tables,  could  easily  be 

produced  by  the  local  cabinet-maker,  or  even  by  a  skilful  carpenter.  Besides 

making  the  homespun  sheets  and  blankets,  quilts,  and  comforters,  the  women 

of  the  family  made  mattresses  and  pillows  stuffed  with  the  feathers  of  home- 

raised  geese.  In  addition  to  their  many  other  tasks  they  made  candles  and 
soap. 

„  ,Inve"tori,f  of.  |able-ware  and  kitchen  utensils  bring  to  light  only  a  few 
boughten  articles,  and  these  were  carefully  treasured  and  handed  down 
from  parents  to  children.  Wood  was  the  commonest  material.  It  was  used 
wherever  possible;  of  it  were  made  trenchers,  drinking-cups,  and  tankards 
and  even  spoons.  Pewter  also  was  used  for  these  articles  to  some  extent ;  but 
china,  porcelain,  glass,  or  silverware  were  rarely  seen.  In  the  kitchen,  wooden 

and  earthenware  vessels  predominated,  pots  of  iron,  brass,  or  copper  beine 
comparatively  rare.43  s 


PURCHASES  AND  SALES. 


To  what  extent  the  farmers  in  inland  towns  actually  did  purchase  and 
sel  commodities  we  can  not  at  this  distance  accurately  determine.  Reasoning 
deductively  from  the  facts  presented  above,  we  should  conclude  that  trade 
ot  any  kind  was  of  small  importance  in  rural  communities.  Fragmentary 


°"dTr nA“stnes  ln  colonial  days,  see  Judd,  Hadley,  Massachusetts,  358,  359, 

372,  3/8-380,  387 ,  Diary  of  Rev.  Samuel  Deane,  in  Smith  and  Deane's  Journals  362- 
ChZSebuThar^  78;  Bouton,  Concord,  New  Hampshire,'  524 

Ss  lii°andCIV  '  eW  Hampsh,re’  416-424;  Earle,  Home  Life  in  Colonial  Days, 


10 


130  AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 

data  confirm  this  conclusion.  Occasionally  an  old  account-book  comes  to  light, 
furnishing  a  concrete  illustration  of  the  small  amount  of  buying  and  selling 
which  took  place.  Such  an  account  book  was  kept  by  the  Rev.  Medad 
Rogers,44  the  minister  of  New  Fairfield,  Connecticut,  a  small  town  on  the 
western  boundary  of  the  State.  He  had  the  use  of  a  farm  of  ioo  acres  and 
•in  addition  a  salary  of  $100,  part  of  which  was,  as  the  accounts  show,  paid  in 
kind.  The  accounts  extend  from  1784  to  1822,  but  the  years  in  which  they 
were  most  carefully  kept  are  1792  and  1793.  In  the  1  year  and  9  months 
from  February  14,  1792,  to  November  13,  1793,  his  total  purchases  amounted 
to  i2 3,  10  shillings,  and  11  pence.  The  items  are  as  follows: 


1  pair  wool  cards. 

1  barlow  penknife. 

1  bbl.  linseed  oil  and  paints. 

1  set  pencilled  tea  dishes  and  saucers. 

1  skein  Holland  thread. 

2  bus.  salt. 

2  lbs.  ginger. 

1  lb.  alum. 

1  gal.  rum. 

1  gal.  molasses. 

7  smoaking  pipes. 

1  yard  tobacco. 


3  lbs.  brown  sugar. 

10  lbs.  iron. 

1  iron  pot. 

1  iron  skillet. 

2  earthern  basons. 

2  chamber  pots. 

1  earthern  jug. 

1  small  cream  pot. 

3  milk  pans. 

11  yards  satinet. 

1  yard  everlasting. 
5  yards  coating. 


The  entries  of  goods  purchased  in  other  years  show  the  same  predomi¬ 
nance  of  necessary  commodities  which  could  not  be  produced  on  the  farm. 
Chief  among  these  were  iron,  of  which  in  one  year  he  bought  81  pounds, 
besides  a  bundle  of  nail  rods,  and  salt,  with  occasional  purchases  of  molasses 
and  rum.  Other  entries  show  purchases  of  50  bricks,  a  pork  barrel,  6  cider 
barrels,  a  broadcloth  coat,  and  a  pair  of  shoes.  The  coat  and  the  penciled 
tea-dishes  were  refinements  of  life  which  probably  were  considered  necessary 
to  the  minister’s  social  position  and  set  him  apart  from  the  bulk  of  his 

parishioners.  .  , 

The  entries  of  sales  are  far  less  numerous.  The  chief  items  are  dairy  prod¬ 
ucts,  among  them  one  sale  of  451  pounds  of  cheese.  It  went  to  the  local 
storekeeper  and  was  to  be  paid  for  half  in  cash  and  half  in  merchandise. 
All  the  other  sales  were  small,  such  as  2\  yards  of  tow  cloth,  7  pounds  of  flax, 
3  pounds  of  butter,  a  hind  quarter  of  beef,  and  a  barrel  of  cider. 


THE  FARMER  A  JACK  OF  ALL  TRADES. 


Besides  taking  his  part  in  many  of  the  harder  tasks  of  the  household 
industries,  such  as  breaking,  swingling,  and  hatchehng  flax,  the  farmer  ap¬ 
plied  himself  more  or  less  regularly  to  a  diversity  of  other  tasks  according 
to  his  especial  “  bent  ”  and  opportunities.  On  the  sea-coast,  he  was  frequently 
a  sailor  or  a  fisherman  for  part  of  the  year.  In  inland  towns  he  often  plied 
some  trade  or  other  and  was  classed  as  an  artisan  as  well  as  a  farmer.  Every 
farmer  did  a  multitude  of  odd  jobs  for  himself,  such  as  repairing  old  build¬ 
ings,  and  building  new,  laying  walls  and  stoning  up  wells,  butchering  pigs  and 
cattle,  making  axe-handles  and  brooms,  splitting  staves  and  shingles,  tanning 
leather,  and  cobbling  shoes.  Occasionally  he  performed  some  of  these  tasks 

44  Now  preserved  in  the  library  of  New  Haven  Historical  Society,  New  Haven,  Conn. 


FARM  MANAGEMENT  AND  HOUSEHOLD  ECONOMY 


131 


for  a  neighbor,  who  either  had  not  the  requisite  skill  or  was  too  busy  with 

strictly  agricultural  operations.  Such  service  was  more  often  repaid  in  kind 
than  in  currency. 

Thus  the  Yankee  farmer  acquired  his  proverbial  reputation  for  ingenuity 

and  for  a  moderate  ability  in  a  variety  of  occupations.  Chancellor  Living- 
ston  40  wrote :  & 

.  He  can  mend  his  plough,  erect  his  walls,  thrash  his  corn,  handle  his  axe,  his  hoe, 
his  sithe,  his  saw,  break  a  colt,  or  drive  a  team,  with  equal  address;  being  habituated 
from  early  life  to  rely  on  himself  he  acquires  a  skill  in  every  branch  of  his  profession, 
which  is  unknown  in  countries  where  labor  is  more  divided.” 


CAUSES  OF  HIS  VERSATILITY. 

1  he  versatility  of  the  northern  farmers  ought  not  to  be  credited  to  an 
exceptional  endowment  of  inventive  ingenuity.  There  seems  no  reason  to 
believe  that  they  were  gifted  with  the  “impulse  to  contrivance”  in  any 
higher  degree  than  their  kinsmen  in  the  southern  colonies.  Versatility  was  the 
result  of  their  persistent  endeavors  to  adjust  themselves  to  a  particular  aspect 
of  their  economic  environment,  namely,  the  lack  of  a  market  for  farm  produce. 
The  problem  that  confronted  the  farmer  was  to  get  a  living  for  himself 
and  his  family,  and  to  get  as  good  a  living  as  he  could  with  the  least  expendi¬ 
ture  of  labor.  If  he  had  been  able  to  devote  all  his  attention  to  raising  some 
particular  product,  with  the  proceeds  of  whose  sale  he  could  have  purchased 
the  services  of  specialized  artisans  and  goods  from  abroad,  he  undoubtedly 
would  have  preferred  to  do  so.  It  would  have  tremendously  increased  his 
efficiency  in  production,  and  would  have  lightened  the  labors  of  all  the  mem¬ 
bers  of  his  family.  But  the  lack  of  a  market  was  an  insuperable  obstacle 
to  specialization,  and  consequently  the  family  group  was  forced  to  rely  upon 
itself  and  upon  irregular  exchange  with  other  neighboring  groups  for  the 

necessaries  of  existence,  and  to  do  without,  in  large  measure,  the  comforts 
and  luxuries. 


45  4mcric,an  Agriculture ,  in  Edinburgh  Encyclopedia  (ist  Am.  ed.,  1832)  I  338 
Written  about  1813.  ’  0 


Chapter  X. — Agricultural  Trade. 

THE  LACK  OF  A  HOME  MARKET. 

The  lack  of  an  industrial  population  in  Colonial  America  meant  that  there 
was  practically  no  home  market  for  farm  products.  A  small  market  was 
afforded  by  the  consumption  of  the  fishing  and  trading  communities  on  the 
seacoast,  concentrated  chiefly  in  the  cities  of  Boston,  New  York,  Philadel¬ 
phia,  and  Baltimore.  Taken  together,  their  population  in  1800  was  slightly 
over  150,000.  In  addition,  there  were,  in  the  States  north  of  Maryland,  17 
towns  of  over  5,000  on  tidewater  or  on  the  coast  whose  population  totalled 
about  100,000.  In  the  towns  of  the  second  group  about  one-half  the  inhabi¬ 
tants  seem  to  have  been  engaged  in  agriculture.1  By  this  computation,  there¬ 
fore,  the  market  for  foodstuffs  in  the  commercial  towns  amounted  to 
200,000  persons,  between  7  and  8  per  cent  of  the  total.  Away  from  tidewater 
there  were  but  few  towns  of  more  than  3*000  inhabitants.  Lancaster,  Penn¬ 
sylvania,  whose  population  was  4,292  in  1800,  was  usually  spoken  of  at  that 
time  as  “  the  largest  inland  town  in  the  United  States.  ’  There  were  of  course 
a  great  number  of  small  village  communities,  especially  in  New  England, 
the  largest  of  which  contained  from  50  to  100  houses  grouped  about  the 
church,  the  tavern,  and  the  country  store.  The  village  dwellers  were  for 
the  most  part  farmers — producers  and  not  merely  consumers  of  foodstuffs. 
The  tavern-keeper  and  the  proprietor  of  the  country  store,  the  minister,  the 
lawyers  and  doctors,  the  blacksmith,  the  owners  of  the  village  sawmills,  grist 
mills  and  tanneries  were  regularly  owners  and  operators  of  farms.  They 
were  the  prototypes  of  the  modern  business  and  professional  class,  but  their 
occupations  were  as  yet  not  differentiated  from  the  original  and  all-embracing 
occupation  of  farming.  Only  the  broad  outlines  of  a  future  separation  of 
employments  or  “  division  of  labor  ”  had  been  marked  out. 

MANUFACTURERS  NOT  DIFFERENTIATED  FROM 

AGRICULTURE. 

The  situation  was  well  described  by  Tench  Coxe  2  who  wrote : 

“  Those  of  the  tradesmen  and  manufacturers,  who  live  in  the  country,  generally  reside 
on  small  lots  and  farms,  from  one  acre  to  twenty ;  and  not  a  few  upon  farms  from  twenty 
to  one  hundred  and  fifty  acres;  which  they  cultivate  at  leisure  times,  with  their  own 
hands,  their  wives,  children,  servants,  and  apprentices,  and  sometimes  by  hired  labourers, 
or  by’ letting  out  fields,  for  a  part  of  the  produce,  to  some  neighbour,  who  has  time 

1  See  the  author’s  Rural  Economy  in  New  England,  in  Connecticut  Academy  of  Arts 

and  Sciences  Transactions,  XX,  283.  •  xT  v  u-  *  e  n  it  ,• 

2  View  of  the  United  States,  442.  See  also  Gardiner,  in  N.  Y.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections, 

Publication  Fund  Series,  II,  255;  Allen,  Vermont,  in  Vt.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  I, 

476.  The  subject  of  village  industries  is  discussed  in  the  author’s  Rural  Economy  in 

New  England,  in  Connecticut  Acaademy  of  Arts  and  Sciences,  Transactions,  XX, 

251-276. 

132 


AGRICULTURAL  TRADE 


133 


or  farm  hands  not  fully  employed.  This  union  of  manufactures  and  farming  is  found 
to  be  very  convenient  on  the  grain  farms ;  but  it  is  still  more  convenient  on  the  grazing 
and  grass,  farms,  where  parts  of  almost  every  day,  and  a  great  part  of  every  year,  can 
be  spared  from  the  business  of  the  farm,  and  employed  in  some  mechanical,  handycraft, 
or  manufacturing  business.  These  persons  often  make  domestic  and  farming  carriages, 
implements,  and  utensils,  build  houses  and  barns,  tan  leather,  and  manufacture  hats, 
shoes,  hosiery,  cabinet-work,  and  other  articles  of  clothing  and  furniture,  to  the  great 
convenience  and  advantage  of  the  neighbourhood.” 

Obviously  this  union  of  agriculture  and  manufactures,  the  practice  of  agri¬ 
culture  by  all  the  members  of  the  community,  meant  that  the  villages  were  not 
centers  of  consumption  of  farm  products.  They  were,  however,  the  points 
at  which  produce  for  export  was  collected  through  the  medium  of  the  country 
stores. 


THE  COUNTRY  STORE. 

In  every  village  there  were  one  or  more  country  stores  with  a  varied  stock 
generally  described  as  European  and  West  India  goods.  Under  the  first  head 
were  included  a  few  pieces  of  imported  dress-goods,  crockery,  glassware, 
powder  and  shot,  and  bars  of  iron  and  steel.  The  West  India  goods  were 
salt,  molasses,  rum  and  other  liquors,  indigo,  spices,  and  sugar. 

Practically  all  the  transactions  at  the  country  stores  were  by  barter,  for 
“  hard  ”  money  was  scarce,  and  paper  currency  depreciated  so  rapidly  as  to 
be  but  a  poor  medium  of  exchange.  The  storekeeper  took  in  exchange  for  his 
goods  a  great  variety  of  farm  products — butter,  cheese,  flaxseed,  tow  cloth, 
grain,  provisions,  potash,  feathers,  and  beeswax.  There  was  as  yet  little 
specialization  in  marketing  functions,  and  so  the  storekeeper  usually  under¬ 
took  on  his  own  responsibility  the  resale  of  his  miscellaneous  purchases  in 
the  seaports,  or  if  he  lived  on  the  coast  or  on  a  river,  he  might  be  himself 
a  shipowner  and  exporter.3 

THE  EXPORT  MARKETS. 

The  lack  of  a  wide  market  for  farm  products  was  a  fundamental  charac¬ 
teristic  of  northern  agriculture  in  the  colonial  period.  For  the  tobacco  of 
Maryland  and  Virginia  and  the  rice,  cotton,  and  indigo  of  the  Carolinas  and 
Georgia  there  was  an  insistent  demand  abroad.  These  were  tropical  or  sub¬ 
tropical  products,  which  could  not  be  successfully  grown  in  Europe.  On 
the  basis  of  the  export  trade,  the  large-scale  agriculture  of  the  South  was 
developed  with  its  plantation  system  and  aristocratic  social  organization. 
But  north  of  Maryland  there  were  no  great  agricultural  staples.  The  products 
of  northern  farms  were  the  same  as  those  of  northern  Europe.  The  wheat  of 
Pennsylvania  and  New  York  and  the  beef  and  pork  of  New  England  could 
not  compete,  except  in  times  of  exceptional  scarcity,  in  the  European  markets. 
In  the  West  Indies  the  sugar  plantations  furnished  a  market  of  limited 
dimensions  for  northern  products.  The  result  was  the  continuance  of  small- 
scale,  non-commercial  farming  and  democratic  social  and  political  condi¬ 
tions  throughout  the  North. 

3  Bidwell,  in  Conn.  Academy  of  Arts  and  Sciences,  Transactions,  XX,  258;  see  also 
Schoepf,  Travels,  I,  222;  Miller  and  Wells,  Ryegate,  Vermont,  214;  Kendall, 
Travels,  III,  80;  La  Rochefoucauld,  Travels,  I,  424. 


134 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


EXPORTS  TO  EUROPE. 

The  export  of  wheat  from  the  Middle  Colonies  to  the  ports  of  southern 
Europe  had  begun  before  1700  and  continued  irregularly  throughout  the 
eighteenth  century.  In  the  first  half  of  the  century  the  trade  was  regarded  as 
a  losing  venture.  In  an  official  report  of  1734  from  New  York  we  read: 

“  Wheat  is  the  staple  of  this  Province,  and  tho’  that  commodity  seem  literally  to  inter¬ 
fere  with  the  product  of  Great  Britain,  It  do’s  not  so  in  fact,  for  its  generally  manu¬ 
factur’d  into  flower  and  bread,  and  sent  to  supply  the  sugar  Collonys,  And  whenever  a 
Markett  in  Spain  Portugal  or  other  parts  of  Europe  has  encouraged  the  sending  it 
thither  in  Grain,  the  Adventurers  have  often  suffered  by  the  undertaking,  for  at  this 
remote  distance,  the  intelligence  of  a  demand  reaches  us  so  late,  that  the  marketts  are 
supplyed  before  our  Vessells  come  there,  and  even  if  it  were  otherwise  our  Merchants 
lye  under  vast  and  certain  disadvantages  besides  for  freight  of  Wheat  from  hence  in 
time  of  warr  was  at  least  two  shillings  and  six  pence,  and  in  time  of  peace  is  eighteen 
pence  Sterling  per  bushell  and  by  the  length  of  the  passage  it  often  grows  musty  at 
least  cannot  come  so  fresh  to  Markett  as  from  Great  Britain;  whence  freights  (as  its 
said)  are  not  above  one  quarter  part  of  what  they  are  at  here.”  4 5 * 

In  the  latter  half  of  the  century,  European  conditions  favored  increased 
exports  of  American  grain.  In  Great  Britain  from  1765  to  1793  surpluses 
for  export  alternated  with  deficits  and  the  necessity  of  import.  From  1793 
to  1820  the  grain  imports  of  Great  Britain  uniformly  exceeded  the  exports.0 

On  the  continent  the  wars  of  the  French  Revolution  decreased  the  produc¬ 
tion  of  grain.  A  British  official  inquiry  of  1780°  stated  that  “the  quantity 
of  grain  raised  in  Europe,  in  common  years,  is  not  more  than  equal  to  the 
ordinary  consumption  of  it’s  inhabitants ;  and  that,  in  the  event  of  a  failure 
of  their  crops,  a  supply  can  only  be  expected  from  America !’ 

In  1793  the  exports  of  American  wheat  reached  almost  1,500,000  bushels, 
besides  over  1,000,000  barrels  of  flour.  The  average  annual  exports  for 
the  decade  1791-1800,  however,  were  only  426,000  bushels  of  wheat  and 
703,000  barrels  of  flour.7 

Besides  wheat  and  some  corn,  the  most  important  agricultural  export  to 
Europe  was  flaxseed.  Flaxseed  was  shipped  from  New  York,  Philadelphia, 
and  New  England  ports,  chiefly  to  Ireland.  Kalm  8  wrote  in  1748  from  New 
York: 

“  They  send  ships  to  Ireland  every  year,  laden  with  all  kinds  of  West  India  goods; 
but  especially  with  linseed,  which  is  reaped  in  this  province.  I  have  been  assured,  that 
in  some  years  no  less  than  ten  ships  have  been  sent  to  Ireland,  laden  with  nothing  but 
linseed ;  because  it  is  said  the  flax  in  Ireland  does  not  afford  good  seed.  But  probably 
the  true  reason  is  this:  the  people  of  Ireland,  in  order  to  have  the  better  flax,  make  use 
of  the  plant  before  the  seed  is  ripe,  and  therefore  are  obliged  to  send  for  foreign  seed; 
and  hence  it  becomes  one  of  the  chief  articles  in  trade. 

“At  this  time  a  bushel  of  linseed  is  sold  for  eight  shillings  of  New  York  currency, 
or  exactly  a  piece  of  eight.” 

In  the  years  1790  to  1794  the  average  annual  exports  of  flaxseed  were  241,- 
000  bushels. 

4  N.  Y.  Documents  Relative  to  Colonial  History,  VI,  19. 

5  Tooke,  High  and  Low  Prices  (1st  ed.,  1823),  pt.  Ill,  180  et  seq. 

0  Quoted  in  Coxe,  View  of  the  United  States,  147.  See  also  Sheffield,  Commerce  of  the 
American  States  (6th  ed.,  1784),  73;  Letters  of  Phineas  Bond,  in  Am.  Hist.  Asso. 
Report  (1897),  p.  523. 

7  Pitkin,  Commerce  of  the  United  States  (1835  ed.),  96. 

8  Travels,  I,  255. 


AGRICULTURAL  TRADE 


135 


EXPORTS  TO  THE  WEST  INDIES. 

Of  greater  importance  than  the  European  market  was  that  afforded  by 
the  English,  French,  Spanish  and  other  possessions  in  the  Caribbean  Sea, 
known  as  the  West  Indies.  In  these  islands  great  profits  to  be  obtained  from 
sugar  had  led  to  specialized,  large-scale  agriculture  utilizing  the  labor  of 
negro  slaves.  The  industry  had  prospered  greatly  during  the  eighteenth 
century,  and  the  population  of  both  blacks  and  whites  had  increased.  How¬ 
ever,  at  the  end  of  the  eighteenth  century  there  were  in  the  principal  sugar- 
producing  islands,  those  owned  by  England  and  France,  not  more  than 
1,000,000  negroes  and  less  than  200,000  whites.9 

There  was  no  back  country  in  the  West  Indies,  no  upland  where  the  staples 
could  not  be  raised  and  consequently  no  sharply  defined  region  of  general 
agriculture.  Although  a  considerable  proportion  of  the  acreage  of  the  planta¬ 
tions  was  utilized  for  grazing  and  the  raising  of  provisions,  food  products 
were  not  nearly  sufficient  for  the  support  of  the  population. 

The  principal  exports  from  the  North  American  colonies  to  the  West 
Indies  (both  British  and  foreign)  in  1770  are  given  in  table  18.10  Of  these 


Table  18. — Exports  from  British  North  American  Colonies  to  the  West  hvdies,  1770. 


Commodity. 

Amount. 

Commodity. 

Amount. 

Indian  corn  . bus. 

558,900 

Lard  and  tallow.. lbs. 

172,600 

Flour  and  biscuit.bbls. 

230,600 

Horses  . 

6,000 

Beef  and  pork..bbls. 

28,200 

Live  oxen  . 

3,3oo 

Cheese  . lbs. 

55,400 

Sheep  and  hogs . 

18,500 

exports  a  negligible  fraction  were  from  Canada  and  Nova  Scotia.  Most  of 
the  Indian  corn  was  furnished  not  by  the  northern  colonies,  but  by  Virginia 
and  North  Carolina.  The  animals  and  animal  products  were  mostly  from 
New  England. 

During  the  Revolution,  trade  to  the  West  Indies  was  of  course  interrupted. 
After  independence  had  been  won  by  the  Colonies,  Great  Britain  showed 
herself  willing  to  adopt  a  liberal  commercial  policy  as  regarded  imports  of 
American  goods  into  her  own  ports.  But  the  commerce  of  the  West  Indies 
she  determined  to  monopolize  for  herself  and  for  her  remaining  possessions 
on  the  American  continent.  All  United  States  vessels  were  excluded  from  the 
ports  of  the  British  West  Indies,  although  American  products  might  be 
imported  in  English  vessels.  The  restrictions  were  in  line  with  the  ideals  of 
the  Mercantile  System.  It  was  hoped  that  Canada  and  Newfoundland  might 
be  able  to  feed  the  sugar  colonies  were  the  competition  of  the  United  States 
removed.  The  plan,  however,  did  not  prove  practicable.  Food  shortages 
resulted  which,  according  to  Edwards,* 11  were  responsible  for  the  death  of 
thousands  of  slaves.  No  agreement  could  be  reached  relative  to  the  West 
India  trade  in  the  treaties  of  1794  or  1806.  But  the  difficulty  of  supplying 

9  Edwards,  British  West  Indies  (3d  ed.,  1801),  II,  2;  Morse,  American  Gazetteer,  1810. 

10  From  Sheffield,  Commerce  of  the  American  States  (6th  ed.,  1784),  135-154.  The 

figures  are  averages  for  the  years  I77I-I773,  or,  in  some  cases,  for  1768-1770. 

11  British  M/est  Indies  (2d  ed.,  1794),  II,  415. 


136 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


Table  19. — Markets  for  northern  farm  products. — Destination  of  exports  of 
commodities  produced  in  the  northern  colonies /  1770. 

[Source:  Pitkin,  Commerce  of  U.  S.,  edition  of  1816,  pp.  21—23.] 


Great 

Britain 

and 

Ireland. 

South  of 
Europe. 

West 

Indies. 

Total 
exports. b 

Wheat,  bus . 

Bread  and  flour,  tons . 

Indian  corn,  bus . 

Mpal.  bus  . 

161,724 

3,846 

150 

588,561 

18,501 

175,221 

955 

23,449 

402,958 

4,430 

49,337 

851,240 

45,868 

5/8,349 

4,430 

50,383 

312,612 

Peas  and  beans,  bus . 

Flaxseed,  bus . 

311,863 

1,046 

749 

c244 

Beef  and  pork . 

d  2,870 
223,310 
6,692 
12,797 
2,615 

Butter  and  cheese,  lbs . 

223,610 

6,692 

12,797 

2,615 

Horses  . 

Sheep  and  hogs . 

Poultry,  doz . 

“  Includes  exports  from  all  the  British  continental  colonies,  including  the  islands  of  Newfoundland, 
Bahama,  and  Bermuda. 

0  Including  exports  to  Africa. 
c  Barrels. 

4  Tons. 


Table  20. — Agricultural  exports,  selected  commodities,  i792- 

[From  Coxe,  View  of  United  States,  413  et  seq.] 


From 

New 

England. 

From 

Middle 

States. 

From 

Southern 

States. 

Total  a 
United 
States. 

Average,  5 
years.b 

Cereal  and  cereal  products : 

536,699 

Wheat,  bus . 

599 

316,492 

853790 

1,028,792 

Flour,  bbls . 

37,778 

453,165 

333,521 

824,464 

814,362 

Bread,  bbls . 

8,283 

47,407 

25,296 

80  986 

80,413 

Indian  corn,  bus . 

Indian  meal,  bbls . 

119,985 

654,305 

1,190,683 

1,964,973 

1,696,005 

3,590 

42,043 

7,048 

52,681 

61,954 

Oats,  bus . 

99,012 

10,462 

10,259 

119,733 

93,747 

Peas  and  beans,  bus . 

10,546 

43,623 

137,902 

192,071 

126,919 

Flaxseed,  casks  c  . 

11,582 

34,837 

5,962 

52,381 

48,244 

Animals  and  animal  products : 

Horned  cattle  . 

4,000 

385 

l66 

4,551 

4,361 

Horses  . 

5,024 

457 

159 

1 5,656 

5,540 

Mules  . 

1,091 

10,941 

10 

I,IOI 

901 

10,846 

Sheep  . 

732 

480 

I2T53 

Hogs  . 

5,566 

1,084 

14,641 

21,291 

11,749 

Poultry,  doz . 

5,173 

969 

1,174 

7,3i6 

6,552 

Beef  and  pork,  bbls . 

75,279 

22,516 

14,641 

112,436 

105,851 

Hams  and  bacon,  lbs . 

69525 

426,080 

89,758 

a585,353 

530,326 

Butter,  firkins d  . 

6,259 

4,133 

1,369 

11,761 

15,586 

Cheese,  lbs . 

72,360 

42,540 

11,025 

125,925 

222,957 

Lard,  lbs . 

216  964 

186,620 

III,66l 

515,245 

603,909 

Potatoes,  bus . 

12,187 

6,289 

1,158 

19,634 

*22,839 

Onions,  bus . 

94,388 

15,345 

2,474 

112,207 

'293,223 

Hay,  tons  . 

2,177 

355 

60 

2,592 

1,903 

Potash,  tons  . 

2,966 

4,834 

23 

7,823 

7,214 

a  The  totals  are  given  as  found  in  Coxe,  View  of  the  United  States.  In  some  cases  these  totals  do 
not  agree  with  the  sum  for  the  groups  of  States. 

b  In  the  last  column  are  given  for  comparison  the  average  annual  exports  for  the  5  years  1790— 1794. 
Source:  American  State  Papers,  Commerce  and  Navigation,  I,  pp.  24,  103,  147,  267,  298,  301. 
(Supplement  for  1793  included.) 

c  Cask  =  5  bus.  d  Firkins 56  lbs.  e  Barrel  of  potatoes=:ii  pecks. 

f  Four-year  average,  ropes  and  bushels. 


AGRICULTURAL  TRADE 


137 


the  islands  made  it  necessary  for  the  British  Government  to  open  their 
ports  to  American  vessels  every  year  for  certain  limited  periods.12  France 
permitted  her  West  India  possessions  to  receive  vegetables,  rice,  and  maize 
from  the  United  State's,  but  prohibited  other  breadstuff s  except  in  times  of 
scarcity.  So  frequent  did  such  occasions  become  toward  the  end  of  the  cen¬ 
tury  that  the  prohibition  was  suspended  without  interruption.13 

Table  19  indicates  the  relative  importance  of  the  European  and  West 
Indian  markets  for  northern  agricultural  products  in  1770. 

In  Table  20  are  presented  the  principal  agricultural  exports  of  the  United 
States  for  the  year  1791-1792,  omitting  such  items  as  cotton,  indigo,  rice, 
and  tobacco,  which  were  grown  for  export  exclusively  in  the  South.'  The 


Table  21.  Growth  of  exports  of  northern  farm  products, 

1770-1790. 


[Sources:  For  1770; 
also  2 d  ed.,  1817),  pp. 
Commerce  and  N avigatio 


Pitkin,  Commerce  of  United  States  (ed.  1816: 
21—23;  for  i79°-94>  American  State  Papers: 
n,  I,  24  et  seq.] 


1770. 

Ave.  of  5 
years, 

1790-94. 

Wheat,  bus . 

851,240 
45  868 

Bread  and  flour,  tons . 

Flour,  tons  a  . 

71,257 

80,413 

Bread,  bbls . 

Indian  corn,  bus . 

578,349 
312,612 
32  588 
223,610 

O  T  Qj 

Flaxseed,  bus . 

241,240 

105,851 

1,151,796 

Beef  and  pork,  bbls.a . 

Butter  and  cheese,  lbs . 

Cattle  . 

Horses  . 

ao4 

f\ 

4,301 

5,540 

22,595 

Sheep  and  hogs . 

Poultry,  doz . 

2,615 

°  552 

a  The  long  ton  was  used  in  making  these  reductions. 


extent  to  which  the  latter  section  competed  with  New  England  and  the  Mid¬ 
dle  States  in  the  export  of  foodstuffs  is  noteworthy  and  is  probably  even 
more  important  than  the  table  indicates,  since  much  southern  wheat  was 
milled  in  Philadelphia,  and  Indian  corn  raised  in  Maryland  and  Virginia 
was  exported  from  New  England  ports. 

A  comparison  of  the  exports  of  the  most  important  foodstuffs  in  1770 
with  the  figures  for  1790  to  1794  shows  significant  increases  in  the  twenty- 
year  period.  (See  Table  21.) 


INTERNAL  TRADE. 


The  principal  currents  of  internal  trade  in  northern  farm  products  were: 
(0  from  the  back  country  to  the  seaports,  Baltimore,  Philadelphia,  New 
York,  and  the  ports  of  New  England,  chiefly  Boston;  and  (2)  the  coasting 


12 

13 


Pitkin,  Commerce  of  the  United  States  (1835  ed.),  178. 
Jefferson’s  Works  (ed.  1853),  III,  510. 


138 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


trade  by  which  the  maritime  region  of  New  England  was  supplied  with  bread- 
stuffs  from  the  Middle  and  Southern  Colonies,  sending  in  return  livestock 

salted  meat,  and  dairy  products. 

TRADE  OF  PHILADELPHIA  WITH  THE  BACK  COUN1RY. 

For  the  farms  west  of  the  Susquehanna  River  in  Pennsylvania  transporta¬ 
tion  was  easier  to  the  Baltimore  market ;  nevertheless,  Philadelphia  drew 
trade  Tom  an  extensive  area.  It  had  excellent  facilities  for  communication 
with  the  interior  by  water  and  better  land  transportation  than  elsewhere  m 
the  colonies.  It  was  the  market  for  all  of  eastern  Pennsylvania,  the  wester 
counties  of  New  Jersey,  the  northern  counties  of  Delaware,  and  even  for 
the  newer  settlements  along  the  southern  boundary  of  central  New  \oik 

State. 

From  the  immediate  neighborhood  came  firewood,  vegetables,  fat  cattle, 
and  dairy  products  for  the  consumption  of  city  population  (41,000  in  iboo). 
The  marketing  was  largely  done  by  the  farm  women,  who  carried  then  pro¬ 
duce,  butter,  poultry,  fresh  meat,  etc.,  in  large  wallets  or  panniers  slung  across 
horses.  Two-horse  carts  came  into  general  use  about  the  middle  of  t 

century.14 

Overland  transportation  of  farm  products  was  confined  to  very  short 
distances  in  most  regions  of  colonial  America  on  account  of  the  poorness  ot 
the  roads.  In  southeastern  Pennsylvania,  however,  the  roads  had  been 
sufficiently  improved  so  that  wheat  could  be  carted  in  wagons  for  distances 
of  so  or  60  miles.  The  German  farmers  in  Lancaster,  Lebanon,  and  York 
counties  were  noted  for  their  heavy  wagons  and  teams  of  Conestoga  horses. 

Rush  15  wrote : 

“A  large  and  strong  waggon  covered  with  linen  cloth,  is  an  essential  part  of  the 
furniture  of  a  German  farm.  In  this  waggon,  drawn  by  four  or  five  large  horses  of  a 
peculiar  breed ;  they  convey  to  market  over  the  roughest  roads,  between  2  or  3  thousand 
pounds  weight  of  the  produce  of  their  farms.  In  the  months  of  September  and  October, 
it  is  no  uncommon  thing,  on  the  Lancaster  and  Reading  roads,  to  meet  in  one  day  from 
fifty  to  an  hundred  of  these  waggons,  on  their  way  to  Philadelphia,  most  of  which 

belong  to  German  farmers.” 

Herds  of  cattle  were  driven  overland  for  hundreds  of  miles  to  be  fattened 
near  Philadelphia,  from  the  back  country  of  Pennsylvania,  from  the  uplands 
of  the  Southern  States,  and  even  from  New  England. 

In  the  matter  of  water  communication  Philadelphia  was  exceptionally 
favored  At  the  time  of  the  spring  and  fall  freshets  wheat  and  timber  were 
floated  down  the  Delaware  River  on  flat  boats  to  the  city  from  points  ioo  to 
1 50  miles  distant  in  the  back  country.  At  Reading,  on  the  Schuylkill  River, 
wheat  was  collected  in  the  winter  in  great  quantities  to  be  sent  down  to 
Philadelphia  in  the  spring.  The  wheat  and  timber  from  the  valleys  of  the 
Susquehanna  and  its  tributaries  went  principally  to  Baltimore,  but  to  some 

14  Smith,  Wright st own,  Pennsylvania,  in  Buck,  Bucks  County,  19;  (Appendix)  Davis, 

Bucks  County,  Pennsylvania,  713.  ,  T  x  c.  nis0 

1 5  Penn  German  Society,  Proceedings  and  Addresses,  XIX  (1910),  67.  bee  a 

Schoepf,  Travels,  I,  204,  II,  22;  Ellis  and  Evans,  Lancaster  County,  Pennsylvania, 

35o;  Weld,  Travels,  I,  93. 


AGRICULTURAL  TRADE 


139 


extent  Philadelphia  was  the  market  for  this  region  also,  being  reached  by 
transhipment  and  land  transportation  across  the  peninsula  between  the  rivers 
a  distance  of  about  20  miles.16 

On  account  of  its  strategic  geographical  position  in  the  center  of  the  chief 
wheat-producing  area,  Philadelphia  became  early  in  the  eighteenth  century 
the  most  important  center  of  the  grain  trade.  By  1765  its  superiority  to 
i\ew  York  was  clearly  shown  in  the  quantity  of  flour,  bread,  and  grain 
exported.  In  that  year  Philadelphia  exported  367,522  bushels  of  wheat 
and  18,714  tons  of  flour  and  bread.  New  York’s  exports  were  only  109,666 
bushels  of  wheat  and  5,519  tons  of  flour  and  bread.17  The  quality  of  the  flour 
produced  at  the  famous  Brandywine  mills  was  generally  acknowledged  to 
be  better  than  that  of  New  York,  even  in  the  latter  city,  and  was  regularly 
preferred  in  the  West  India  market.18  The  exports  of  flour  from  Philadel¬ 
phia  just  before  the  Revolution  averaged  268,000  barrels  a  year.  By  1787 
they  had  fallen  to  202,000  barrels,  but  recovery  was  rapid,  in  1789  the  figure 
was  369,000  barrels  and  in  1792,  420,000  barrels.19 


TRADE  OF  NEW  YORK  WITH  THE  BACK  COUNTRY. 


The  back  country  tributary  to  the  port  of  New  York  was  less  extensive 
than  that  which  supplied  the  exports  of  Philadelphia  and  less  productive 
as  well.  It  was  this  circumstance  which  was  largely  responsible  for  the  slower 
growth  of  the  population  on  Manhattan.  In  1786  the  city  had  less  than 
25,000  inhabitants,  but  after  that  date  there  was  rapid  expansion,  the  census 
of  1800  reporting  6o,ooo.20  Land  transportation  to  New  York  was  less 
important  than  to  Philadelphia,  but  by  water  its  market  was  easy  of  access. 
The  farmers  of  northeastern  New  Jersey  drove  cattle  and  shipped  wheat 
and  flour,  corn,  beef,  and  pork,  flaxseed,  potatoes,  and  firewood  to  New 
York,  but  those  in  the  western  counties  traded  with  Philadelphia.21  From 
western  Long  Island  came  wheat,  cattle,  and,  provisions,  Almost  every  town 
on  the  northern  shore  of  Long  Island  Sound,  as  far  east  as  Providence, 
had  small  sloops  carrying  grain,  flour,  beef,  pork,  potatoes,  and  firewood 
to  New  York.  The  following  is  a  partial  list  of  the  commodities  shipped 
trom  New  Haven  in  1801,  which  went  almost  wholly  to  New  York:  Cheese, 
220,000  pounds;  pork  and  beef  hams,  24,000  pounds;  pork,  1,900  barrels; 
beef ,1,700  barrels;  butter,  800  firkins;  lard,  600  firkins;  corn  meal,  1,000 
hogsheads  and  1,200  barrels;  rye  flour,  230  barrels;  barley,  1,500  bushels; 
Indian  corn,  300  bushels ;  rye,  200  bushels ;  oats,  530  bushels ;  beans,  280 
bushels;  potatoes,  160  bushels.22  New  York  did  not  control  all  the  trade  of 


16 

17 

18 


19 

20 
21 

22 


Cooper,  Information  Respecting  America,  no;  Schoepf,  Travels,  I,  47;  Smith  New 
Jersey,  I,  486;  Scot,  Geographical  Description  of  Pennsylvania  74. 

v  irginia  Gazette,  Apr.  9,  1767. 

NhY'^°CiLTe%S  Relati.ve  t0T  Colonial  History,  V,  57;  N.  Y.  Soc.  for  Promotion  of 
i!fUA?rtS’  Tr.ansacHons>  I  (2d  ed.,  1801),  25.  For  a  conflicting  opinion  see  Strick¬ 
land,  Observations,  41.  A  contemporary  description  of  the  Brandywine  mills  is 
given  by  I  uton,  in  American  Museum,  Y,  380. 

Coxe,  View  of  United  States,  64;  Proud,  Pennsylvania,  II,  271. 

Hardie,  Description  of  Nezu  York,  151. 

On  the  agricultural  exports  of  New  Jersey,  see  Kalm,  Travels,  I,  230 ;  Smith,  New 
Jersey,  I,  488,  490,  492,  496,  497,  499. 

Dwight,  Statistical  Account  of  New  Haven,  67. 


140  AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 

Connecticut.  Many  ports  of  that  State  shipped  farm  products  directly  to  the 

West  Indies.  .  .  .  ,  . 

The  principal  artery  of  communication  between  New  York  and  the  interior 

was  of  course  the  Hudson  River.  Down  this  stream  came  the  grain  and  dairy 
products,  potash,  and  timber  from  western  New  England  and  from  a  narrow 
strip  of  country  west  of  the  river  in  New  York  State,  extending  as  far  north 

as  Albany.  .  a 

Wheat  was  the  most  important  commodity  shipped  down  the  Hudson. 

Even  in  the  days  of  the  Dutch  occupation  the  wheat  of  Esopus  was  renowned. 
Farmers  had  begun  to  raise  wheat  in  the  Mohawk  Valley  soon  after  the 
Peace  of  Utrecht  (1713)  and  their  success  had  encouraged  rapid  settlement. 
By  1750  flour  was  being  shipped  from  Sir  William  Johnson’s  colony  at 
Amsterdam  to  the  West  Indies,  and  a  few  years  later  the  country  for  60 
miles  west  of  Schenectady  was  shipping  wheat  by  sleighs  in  winter  to  that 
point  for  eventual  transhipment  to  Albany  and  to  New  York.23  By  the  end  of 
the  century  Mohawk  wheat  had  acquired  a  high  reputation  and  was  grown  for 
export  as  far  as  100  miles  west  of  Albany. 

Richard  Smith 24  wrote  in  1769  that  there  were  at  Albany  “31  sloops 
.  which  carry  from  400  to  500  Barrels  of  Flour  each,  trading  con¬ 

stantly  from  thence  to  York  &  that  they  make  Eleven  or  12  Trips  a  year 
each.”  The  town  of  Catskill  on  the  Hudson  had  prospered  greatly  after 
the  Revolution  through  the  rapid  development  of  its  trade  by  wagonroad 
with  the  back  country  of  the  Hudson  Valley  and  of  western  Connecticut. 

“  Six  hundred  and  twenty-four  bushels  of  wheat  were  brought  to  the  Catskill  market 
in  1792.  Forty-six  thousand  one  hundred  and  sixty-four  bushels  came  in  1800.  On  a 
single  day  in  1801  the  merchants  bought  four  thousand  one  hundred  and  eight  bushels 
of  wheat,  and  the  same  day  eight  hundred  loaded  sleighs  came  into  the  village  by  the 
western  road.”  25 

A  historian  of  the  town  wrote  in  1803:  “Between  fifteen  and  sixteen 
hundred  sleighs,  containing  chiefly  wheat  and  potash,  have  been  unloaded  in 
the  village  in  one  day.”  26  At  this  time  there  were  15  sloops  owned  in  the 
town,  12  of  which  were  engaged  in  carrying  produce  to  New  York,  2  to 
Boston,  and  1  to  the  Southern  States.27 

TRADE  OF  NEW  ENGLAND  PORTS. 

The  trade  of  Boston,  the  largest  seaport  of  New  England,  with  the  back 
country  was  less  than  that  of  New  York  or  Philadelphia.  On  this  account 
the  growth  of  Boston  was  relatively  slow  and  in  1800  it  had  but  25,000  inhabi¬ 
tants.  The  shipment  of  New  England  farm  products  was  not  concentrated 
in  a  single  port,  but  was  carried  on  from  a  large  number  of  points.  The  New 
Englanders  were  already  famous  for  their  maritime  interests,  good  harbors 

23  A/".  Y.  Documents  Relative  to  Colonial  History ,  VI,  207;  Richard  Smith,  Journal, 

p.  xlix ;  Strickland,  Observations,  8. 

25  From  Hampshire  Gazette,  Apr.  1,  1801,  quoted  by  McMaster,  United  States,  II,  5 7^ 

26  Rev.  Clark  Brown  in  Mass.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections ,  1st  series,  IX,  119. 

27  Ibid.,  1 18.  On  this  subject  see  also  Kalm,  Travels,  II,  246;  Campbell,  Travels,  2  3, 

288;  Richard  Smith’s  Journal,  12,  76. 


AGRICULTURAL  TRADE 


141 


were  abundant,  and  at  all  of  them — Portsmouth,  Newburyport,  Salem,  Boston, 
Barnstable,  New  Bedford,  Providence,  New  London,  New  Haven,  Fairfield — 
there  were  small  crafts  engaged  in  carrying  beef  and  pork,  butter  and  cheese, 
cider,  hay,  vegetables,  and  livestock  to  the  West  Indies  and  to  the  Southern 
States. 

There  were,  therefore,  a  great  many  streams  of  trade  trickling  from  the 
back  country  to  the  seaports  in  New  England.  Among  them  a  few  main  cur¬ 
rents  may  be  distinguished.  We  have  already  mentioned  the  shipment  of 
grain  and  dairy  products  from  western  New  England  down  the  Hudson  River. 
Not  all  the  trade  of  this  region  went  south.  From  the  neighborhood  of  Lake 
Champlain,  pot  and  pearl  ashes  and  beef  were  sent  to  Quebec  in  Canada  and 
salt  and  rum  were  imported  in  exchange.28  The  Connecticut  River  furnished  a 
cheap  means  of  transportation  throughout  the  middle  of  New  England.  Al¬ 
though  originally  navigable  only  as  far  as  Enfield  in  Connecticut,  65  miles  from 
the  Sound,  a  series  of  canals  constructed  after  1790  had  made  possible  the  pas¬ 
sage  of  small  boats  for  100  miles  further  north.  Above  Hartford  only  flat-bot¬ 
tomed  crafts  of  10  to  20  tons  burden  could  be  used.  According  to  Dwight 29 
a  fleet  of  14  boats  made  regular  trips  about  the  year  1800  between  Hartford 
and  the  head  of  navigation  in  Vermont.  They  carried  down  potash  and  pearl 
ash,  staves,  shingles,  grain,  beef,  flaxseed,  and  linseed  oil,  and  took  back 
rum,  salt,  molasses,  dry  goods,  iron,  and  tea.  Each  round  trip  required  25 
days  and  only  9  trips  could  be  made  in  a  season.  At  Hartford  goods  from 
up  river  had  to  be  transhipped  into  small  schooners  and  sloops,  which,  after 
collecting  additional  quantities  of  provisions  and  some  vegetables  from  the 
towns  on  the  lower  river,  sailed  for  New  York  or  the  West  Indies.30 

THE  BOSTON  MARKET. 

In  eastern  New  England  the  Merrimac  Valley  was  an  artery  of  trade  roughly 
parallel  to  the  Connecticut  River.  The  Merrimac  was  navigable  only  for  20 
miles  to  Haverhill.  But  its  valley  provided  a  natural  route  for  overland  trans¬ 
portation.  A  great  thoroughfare  ran  through  it,  affording  an  outlet  for 
the  products  of  northern  and  northwestern  New  Hampshire  to  the  ports  of 
Salem,  Newburyport,  and  Boston.  Over  this  route  herds  of  fat  cattle  were 
driven  to  the  Boston  market.  In  winter  sleds  or  pungs  were  used,  square  oblong 
wooden  boxes  on  runners  shod  with  iron.  In  these  conveyances  a  great  vari¬ 
ety  of  produce  was  conveyed  to  the  Boston  market — boxes  of  cheese,  barrels 
of  apples,  tubs  of  butter,  winter  squash,  turkeys,  chickens,  eggs,  and  on  top 
of  all  carcasses  of  slaughtered  hogs. 

The  teaming  was  of  two  kinds.  There  was  a  class  of  professional  teamsters,  who 
drove  large  wagons,  drawn  by  four,  six,  or  eight  horses,  serving  the  merchants  of  the 
up-country.  .....  Wool,  butter,  cheese,  and  whatever  sought  the  market  would  furnish 
the  loads,  while  salt,  molasses,  dry  goods,  rum,  and  all  the  varieties  kept  by  the  mis¬ 
cellaneous  ‘  country  store  ’  were  taken  on  the  return.  Another  class  of  teams  probably 
more  numerous,  though  smaller,  was  driven  by  farmers,  who  took  a  trip  or  two  yearly 

28  Belknap  Papers ,  in  Mass.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  5th  series,  II,  143;  Graham,  Descrip¬ 
tive  Sketch  of  Vermont,  40. 

Z  Travels  (1821  ed.),  IV,  155;  see  also  Kendall,  Travels,  III,  218. 

0  Porter,  Historical  Discourse,  46. 


142 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


to  market,  carrying  their  own  produce,  beef,  pork,  or  whatever  they  had  to  sell,  and 
returning  with  articles  for  home  consumption  or  for  the  merchants. 

Another  important  overland  route  in  the  latter  half  of  the  eighteenth  cen¬ 
tury  ran  between  the  Connecticut  Valley  towns,  in  central  Massachusetts,  and 
Boston.  Cattle  and  hogs  were  driven  over  this  route  before  i75°-  Small  quan¬ 
tities  of  goods  were  transported  on  horseback  until  about  1770,  when  sleighs 
first  came  into  use.  Later,  wagons  drawn  by  horses  were  used  in  more  or  less 
regular  freighting  to  and  from  Boston.  Grain,  pork  and  potash  were  carried 
eastward  in  quantities  of  a  ton  at  a  load.  The  return  cargo  was  largely  rum.32 


THE  COASTING  TRADE. 

The  thirteen  colonies  along  the  Atlantic  seaboard  had  become  sufficiently 
differentiated  economically  in  the  eighteenth  century  to  be  separated  into  three 
groups:  (1)  New  England,  (2)  the  Middle  Colonies,  and  (3)  the  Southern 
Colonies.  The  first  group  was  distinguished  by  the  prominence  of  maritime 
pursuits  and,  in  agriculture,  by  the  importance  of  the  grazing  industry.  In 
Pennsylvania,  New  York,  and  New  Jersey  agriculture  was  relatively  more 
important  than  in  New  England  and  commerce  and  fishing  less  so.  Gram 
production  for  export  was  a  distinguishing  feature  of  farming  in  the. Middle 
Colonies.  The  southern  colonies  were  predominantly  agricultural  in  their  inter¬ 
ests.  Virginia  and  Maryland  produced  both  grain  and  tobacco  for  export, 
the  upland  country  raised  cattle,  and  finally  on  the  coastal  plains  of  Georgia 
and  the  Carolinas  were  found  rice,  indigo,  and  cotton  plantations.  It  was  the 
specialization  thus  broadly  outlined  which  was  the  basis  of  the  exchange  of 
commodities  between  the  colonies. 


DEPENDENCE  OF  NEW  ENGLAND  ON  FOODSTUFFS  FROM  THE 

SOUTHERN  AND  MIDDLE  COLONIES. 


During  the  first  half  of  the  eighteenth  century  the  commercial  population 
of  New  England  became  regularly  dependent  on  the  Southern  and  Middle 
Colonies  for  breadstuffs.  Grain  was  still  shipped  from  Connecticut  and  west¬ 
ern  Massachusetts  to  Boston  in  the  first  half  of  the  century,  but  such  supplies 
were  unreliable  and  Boston  by  1750  was  regularly  importing  breadstuff s  from 
New  York,  Philadelphia,  and  Baltimore.  By  the  end  of  the  century  flour  was 
being  imported  even  into  the  former  grain-exporting  region  of  the  Connecti¬ 
cut  Valley.33 

The  provision  of  an  adequate  supply  of  grain  for  the  city  of  Boston  was 
considered  so  important  that  a  public  granary  was  established  in  1728,  and 
for  more  than  50  years  a  committee  of  selectmen  was  appointed  each  year 
to  purchase  grain,  superintend  the  granary,  and  regulate  the  sale  of  grain  from 
the  public  stock.  By  1 784  private  importation  had  become  sufficiently  reliable 
and  the  municipal  undertaking  was  abandoned.34  _ 


31  Hazen,  Billerica  (Mass.),  274.  See  also  Greene,  Groton  Historical  Senes,  1st  series, 

I,  5;  Bouton,  Concord,  N.  H.,  536-  „  _  ,  ,,  ,  a  u 

32  Judd,  Hadley,  Massachusetts,  37L  382,  384;  Carpenter  and  Morehouse,  Amherst, 

Massachusetts,  75- 


33  Judd,  Hadley,  354. 

34  Boston  Tozvn  Records,  VIII,  99>  I0L  110  > 

author  is  indebted  to  Dr.  O.  C.  Stine. 


XI,  233;  XII, 


270. 


For  this  reference  the 


AGRICULTURAL  TRADE 


143 


There  were  of  course  differences  of  opinion  in  New  England  regarding 
the  advantages  of  the  importations  of  foodstuffs,  and  voices  of  protest  were 
not  wanting.  We  read  in  an  anonymous  pamphlet  of  1750: 

“  We  supply  ourselves  from  other  Governments,  in  a  great  Measure  with  provisions 
of  various  sorts,  which  Strangers  tell  us,  is  a  Shame  for  us  to  do;  and  we  ourselves  ought 
to  think  it  a  Shame ;  for  we  have  many  different  Soils,  as  well  adapted  to  those  Neces¬ 
saries  of  Life  as  our  Neighbors.  Corn,  Rye,  Barley  and  Oats  we  are  sure,  from  our 
own  Experience,  are  quite  easy  to  be  raised  among  us;  and  I  believe,  were  we  as 
industrious  as  some  other  Nations,  we  should  raise  enough  not  only  for  our  own  Con¬ 
sumption,  but  also  for  Exportation,  if  required ;  but  instead  of  so  doing,  we  pay  large 
Sums  for  those  Commodities  to  some  of  our  neighboring  Provinces.”  35 

Governor  Hutchinson,  on  the  other  hand,  had  already  perceived  the  sound 
economic  basis  of  food  imports.  He  wrote : 36 

It  seems  agreed  that  the  southern  colonies  as  far  as  Virginia  are  designed  by  nature 
for  grain  countries.  It  behoves  us  therefore,  either  like  the  Dutch  for  the  other  nations 
in  Europe,  to  become  carriers  for  them  with  our  shipping,  or  to  contrive  some  articles 
of  produce  or  manufacture  for  barter  or  exchange  with  them,  rather  than  in  vain  to 
attempt  raising  to  more  advantage  than  they  do,  what  nature  has  peculiarly  formed 
them  for.” 

The  fishing  and  lumbering  population  of  the  coast  of  Maine  were  to  a 
large  extent  dependent  on  the  import  of  breadstuffs  from  the  Middle  Colonies 
throughout  the  eighteenth  century.  Owing  to  the  imperfections  of  the  market- 
ing  organization  of  those  days,  supplies  were  not  always  regularly  forthcoming 
and  periods  of  scarcity  and  famine  were  not  infrequent.  The  condition  of  a 
coast  town  at  such  a  time  is  described  in  the  memorial  presented  by  the 
inhabitants  of  Kittery,  1751,  to  the  Massachusetts  legislature:37 

In  the  whole  town  there  are  about  Two  Hundred  and  Eighty  Four  families  or 
house-holders,  and  one  quarter  part  of  them  Cannot  raise  one  bushel  of  Corn,  or  any 
Sort  of  Grain  in  a  \ear,  nor  are  they  able  to  raise  a  Supply  of  any  Sort  of  Provisions, 
but  Depend  upon  others  for  their  Supply.  Not  one  in  ten  through  the  whole  Town  does 
raise  a  full  Sufficiency  for  their  own  familys  to  live  on  the  year  about.  Not  one  in  thirty 
that  Can  raise  any  Provisions  to  spare  So  that  the  Town  in  General  Depend  upon 
buying,  but  have  nothing  to  Purchase  withall,  as  the  times  now  are,  but  what  they  go 
and  work  for  in  other  Towns  and  places.” 

The  interruption  of  food  supplies  during  the  Revolution  caused  great  distress 
on  the  Maine  coast.38 

New  England  paid  for  her  imports  of  breadstuffs  partly  by  the  services 
of  her  coasting  vessels,  in  carrying  the  commerce  of  other  colonies,  and  partly 
with  her  own  farm  products.  Fatted  cattle  were  driven  to  the  New  York 
market  and  occasionally  to  Philadelphia.  Wool,  hops,  and  barley  were  sent 
to  that  city  or  to  New  York.  To  Georgia  and  the  Carolinas  were  shipped  beef, 
pork,  livestock,  dairy  products,  apples,  hay,  and  in  fact  much  the  same  products 
that  went  to  the  West  Indies.  The  rice,  indigo,  and  cotton  plantations  of 
the  southern  coastal  plains  were  comparable  in  many  respects  to  the  sugar 

35  Some  Observations  Relating  to  Massachusetts  Bay,  15. 

30  Massachusetts  Bay,  II,  442. 

37  In  Maine  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  1st  series,  IV,  200. 

38  North,  Augusta,  Maine,  153.  On  conditions  in  Maine  in  the  eighteenth  century  see 

Rev.  Thomas  Smith’s  Journal,  in  Smith  and  Deane’s  Journals;  Sullivan,  Maine,  6, 

43 ;  Lincoln’s  Observations  on  the  Climate,  Soil,  etc.,  of  the  District  of  Maine,  in 

Mass.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  1st  series,  IV,  146. 


144 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


plantations.  They  found  specialization  in  their  “  cash  ”  crops  so  profitable 
that  it  seemed  as  if  they  could  not  afford  to  raise  their  own  food  supplies. 
Although  the  plantations  occupied  but  a  small  area  of  the  farming  land  in  these 
colonies,  an  intervening  strip  of  pine  barrens  cut  them  off  from  the  region 
of  general  farming  in  the  back  country.  The  products  of  the  Middle  Colo¬ 
nies  and  of  New  England  which  were  marketed  in  the  Georgia  and  Carolina 
lowlands  included  grain  from  New  York  and  Pennsylvania,  cheese  and  butter, 
dried  fish,  salted  beef,  apples,  potatoes,  hay  and  cider  from  New  England,  and 
in  addition  various  products  of  the  household  industries,  such  as  tow  cloth 
for  negro  garments,  and  woodenware.39 

a9  Belknap,  New  Hampshire ,  III,  218;  Bond,  Letters  in  Am.  Hist.  Asso.  Report  (1897), 
p.  560. 


Part  III 

EXPANSION  AND  PROGRESS  1800-1840 


. 


- 


?  m 


Chapter  XI. — Pioneering  West  of  the  Alleghenies. 

WESTWARD  MOVEMENT  OF  POPULATION  AND 

OF  AGRICULTURE. 

The  settlement  of  the  Ohio  and  Mississippi  Valleys  in  the  early  decades  of 
the  nineteenth  century  was  one  of  the  great  colonizing  movements  of  modern 
times,  great  both  in  the  numbers  of  men  who  participated  and  in  its  signifi¬ 
cance  in  our  political  and  economic  history.  Viewed  broadly,  the  move¬ 
ment  of  our  population  across  the  Alleghenies  was  but  a  phase  in  that  con¬ 
tinuous  process  of  pioneering  in  which  we  had  been  engaged  for  almost  two 
centuries.  There  was  little  new  in  the  motives  for  this  newest  drift  to  the 
frontier.  The  desire  to  exchange  exhausted  farms  for  cheap,  fertile  land  and 
the  craving  for  the  excitement  and  romance  of  a  new  life  in  a  new  country 
were  as  power  ful  in  the  nineteenth  century  as  they  had  been  in  the  seventeenth 
and  eighteenth.  This  is  not  the  place  to  repeat  in  detail  the  story  of  the  occu¬ 
pation  of  the  western  country  which  had  been  so  well  told  elsewhere.1  It  may 
be  helpful,  however,  to  point  out  here  some  of  the  more  important  stages 

in  the  great  migration  and  to  indicate  a  few  of  the  circumstances  which  affected 
it. 

Before  the  Revolution  the  territory  west  of  the  Alleghenies  was  practically 
uninhabited,  save  for  the  wandering  Indian  tribes  and  a  few  scattered  out¬ 
posts  of  French  colonists.  Hunters  and  trappers  had  spied  out  the  country, 
and  lured  by  their  glowing  accounts  adventurous  Virginia  backwoodsmen  had 
founded  settlements  in  Kentucky.  Figure  5  shows  the  extent  of  settlement 
in  1/90)  the  date  of  the  first  census.  In  general,  the  line  of  the  frontier  was 
still  fixed  by  the  Allegheny  mountains.  In  New  York  State  a  tongue  of  settle¬ 
ment,  following  the  Mohawk  Valley  in  a  broad  gap  between  the  Adirondacks 
and  the  Catskills,  had  reached  beyond  the  center  of  the  State,  occupying  the 
whole  of  the  Mohawk  Valley  and  the  country  surrounding  the  interior  lakes. 
In  Pennsylvania  the  general  line  of  settlement  was  the  southeastern  edge  of 
the  Allegheny  plateau,  but  it  had  extended  considerably  beyond  this  in  the 
southwestern  portion  of  the  State,  reaching  as  far  as  the  junction  of  the 
Allegheny  and  Monongahela  Rivers  at  Pittsburg.  North  of  the  Ohio  River 
the  land  was  unoccupied  save  for  the  single  settlement  at  Marietta  (1788) 
and  the  French  outposts  on  the  Illinois  and  Mississippi  Rivers. 

By  1800,  settlement  in  New  York  had  advanced  up  the  Mohawk  and, 
widening  its  path,  extended  from  the  southern  border  of  the  state  to  Lake 
Ontario.  Northern  Pennsylvania  west  of  the  Susquehanna  was  still  unin¬ 
habited.  But  in  the  south  the  settlements  around  Pittsburg,  becoming  increas- 

1  Roosevelt,  Winning  of  the  West,  tells  of  the  passing  of  the  southern  half  of  the 
frontier  across  the  Alleghenies  before  the  Revolution.  Turner,  The  Frontier  in 
American  History,  ch.  IV,  and  The  Rise  of  the  New  West,  gives  the  best  account 
of  the  westward  movement,  1790  to  1840. 


147 


148  AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 

ingly  dense,  had  spilled  over  into  Ohio,  and  along  the  western  border  a 
tongue  of  settlement  extended  up  to  Lake  Erie. 

“  Bv  the  opening  of  the  nineteenth  century,  when  Napoleon’s  cession  brought  to  the 
United  States  the  vast  spaces  of  the  Louisiana  Purchase  beyond  the  Mississippi,  the 
pioneers  had  hardly  more  than  entered  the  outskirts  of  the  forest  along  the  Ohio  and 
Lake  Erie.  But  by  1810  the  government  had  extinguished  the  Indian  title  to  the  unse¬ 
cured  portions  of  the  Western  Reserve,  and  to  great  tracts  of  Indiana,  along  the  Ohio 
and  up  the  Wabash  Valley;  thus  protecting  the  Ohio  highway  from  the  Indians,  and 


opening  new  lands  to  settlement.  The  embargo  had  destroyed  the  trade  of  New  England, 
and  had  weighted  down  her  citizens  with  debt  and  taxation ;  caravans  of  Yankee  emi¬ 
grant  wagons,  precursors  of  the  ‘prairie  schooner,’  had  already  begun  to  cross  Pennsy  - 
vania  on  their  way  to  Ohio;  and  they  now  greatly  increased  in  number.  North  Carolina 
back  countrymen  flocked  to  the  Indiana  settlements,  giving  the  peculiar  Hoosier  flavor 
to  the  State,  and  other  Southerners  followed,  outnumbering  the  Northern  immigrants, 
who  sought  the  eastern  edge  of  Indiana.”  2 


2  Turner,  The  Frontier  in  American  History,  134- 


PIONEERING  WEST  OF  THE  ALLEGHENIES 


149 


The  war  with  Tecumseh  and  the  War  of  1812  hindered  settlement  only 
temporarily,  and  by  the  treaties  made  at  their  conclusion,  and  the  treaties  of 
1818,  the  Indians  were  pressed  still  farther  north. 

In  the  meantime,  Indian  treaties  had  released  additional  land  in  southern  Illinois, 
and  pioneers  were  widening  the  bounds  of  the  old  French  settlements.  Avoiding  the 
rich  savannas  of  the  prairie  regions,  as  devoid  of  wood,  remote  from  transportation 
facilities,  and  suited  only  to  grazing,  they  entered  the  hard  woods — and  in  the  early 


Fig.  6. — Population  per  square  mile,  1810. 


twenties  they  were  advancing  in  a  wedge-shaped  column  up  the  Illinois  Valley . 

While  the  hard  woods  of  Illinois  were  being  entered,  the  pioneer  movement  passed  also 
into  the  Missouri  Valley.  The  French  lead  miners  had  already  opened  the  southeastern 
section,  and  Southern  mountaineers  had  pushed  up  the  Missouri;  but  now  the  planters 
from  the  Ohio  Valley  and  the  upper  Tennessee  followed,  seeking  the  alluvial  soils  for 
slave  labor.  Moving  across  the  southern  border  of  free  Illinois,  they  had  awakened 
regrets  in  that  State  at  the  loss  of  so  large  a  body  of  settlers. 

“Looking  at  the  Middle  West,  as  a  whole,  in  the  decade  from  1810  to  1820,  we  per¬ 
ceive  that  settlement  extended  from  the  shores  of  Lake  Erie  in  an  arc,  following  the 
banks  of  the  Ohio  till  it  joined  the  Mississippi,  and  thence  along  that  river  and  up  the 


ISO  AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 

Missouri  well  into  the  center  of  the  State.  The  next  decade  was  marked  by  the  increased 
use  of  the  steamboat;  pioneers  pressed  farther  up  the  streams,  etching  out  the  hard 
wood  forests  well  up  to  the  prairie  lands,  and  forming  additional  tracts  of  settlement 
in  the  region  tributary  to  Detroit  and  in  the  southeastern  part  of  Michigan.  In  the  area 
of  the  Galena  lead  mines  of  northwestern  Illinois,  southwestern  Wisconsin,  and  north¬ 
eastern  Iowa,  Southeners  had  already  begun  operations;  and  if  we  except  Ohio  and 


Fig.  7. — Population  per  square  mile,  1830. 


Michigan,  the  dominant  element  in  all  this  overflow  of  settlement  into  the  Middle  West 
was  Southern,  particularly  from  Kentucky,  Virginia,  and  North  Carolina.  The  settle¬ 
ments  were  still  dependent  on  the  rivers  for  transportation,  and  the  areas  between  the 
rivers  were  but  lightly  occupied.”  3 

In  the  decade  1830-1840  the  influence  of  the  Erie  Canal  became  apparent. 
It  was  at  this  time  more  important  as  a  highway  of  immigration  than  as  an 
outlet  for  the  products  of  the  West,  carrying  thousands  of  New  Englanders 
to  their  homes  in  the  new  country.  By  1840  settlements  had  been  carried 
over  the  whole  extent  of  Indiana,  Illinois,  and  across  Michigan  and  Wisconsin 


3  Turner,  The  Frontier  in  American  History,  I34-I36. 


PIONEERING  WEST  OF  THE  ALLEGHENIES 


151 


as  far  north  as  the  forty-third  parallel.  Population  had  crossed  the  Mississ¬ 
ippi  River  into  Iowa  Territory,  occupying  a  broad  belt  up  and  down  that 
stream,  and  in  Missouri  settlements  had  spread  northward  from  the  Missouri 
River  nearly  to  the  boundary  of  the  State  and  southward  till  they  covered 
most  of  the  southern  portion. 


Fig.  8. — Population  per  square  mile,  1840. 


The  increase  in  population  in  the  region  west  of  the  Alleghenies  and  north 
of  the  Ohio  is  shown  in  table  22.  The  percentage  increase  by  decades  in  the 
new  territory  is  shown  in  table  23. 

HOW  THE  GOVERNMENT  POLICY  FAVORED  SETTLEMENT— 
THE  FEDERAL  LAND  POLICY,  1785-1840. 

In  the  policy  adopted  by  our  new  national  government  in  respect  to  the 
colonization  of  the  west,  four  important  features  may  be  distinguished.  In 
the  first  place,  by  the  establishment  of  the  territorial  form  of  government, 
liberal  political  privileges  were  guaranteed  the  settlers  in  the  new  country. 


152 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


Their  commercial  relations  with  the  older  communities  to  the  eastward  were 
to  be  forever  free  from  tariff  restrictions  or  duties.  Toward  the  native 
tribes  who  were  occupying  the  land  the  government  adopted  a  firm  policy 
which,  whatever  might  have  been  its  ethical  aspects,  did,  nevertheless,  effec- 


Table  22. — Increase  of  population  west  of  the  Alleghenies,  1790-1840. 


1790. 

1800. 

1810. 

1820. 

1830. 

1840. 

Western  New  York*.... 
Western  Pennsylvania b  . 
Ohio  . 

1,074 

108,934 

17,006 

197,417 

45,365 

5,641 

75,6i8 
290,115 
230,760 
24,520 
12  282 
4762 
20,845 

•  •••••• 

265,325 

390,593 

581,295 

147,178 

55,162 

8,765 

66,557 

406.858 

528,831 

937903 

343,031 

157,445 

31,639 

140,455 

548,308 

729,086 

1,519,467 

685,866 

476,183 

212,267 

383,702 

30,945 

43,H2 

Indiana  . 

Illinois  . 

Michigan  . 

Missouri  . 

Wisconsin  . 

•  •••••• 

Towa  -  - . 

Total  . 

1 10,008 

265,429 

658  902 

1,514,875 

2,546,162 

4,628,936 

a  The  figures  given  for  1790  are  for  Ontario  county  and  for  later  dates  for  approximately  the  same 


b  For  1790  the  counties  of  Allegheny,  Washington,  Fayette,  Westmoreland,  Northumberland,  Bedford, 
Huntingdon,  and  Mifflin  were  included,  and  for  later  dates  approximately  the  same  area.  A  map 
showing  county  lines  as  of  1790  is  given  in  A  Century  of  Population  Growth. 

tively  remove  a  hostile  menace  from  in  front  of  the  advancing  waves  of 
settlement. 

In  the  disposition  of  the  public  lands,  although  financial  considerations  were 
at  first  dominant,  the  policy  eventually  adopted  was  one  which  aimed  to  put 
those  lands  as  speedily  as  possible  into  the  hands  of  actual  settlers.  In  the 


Table  23. — Percentage  increase  of  population  west  of  the  Alleghenies,  1790-1840. 


1790-1800. 

1800-1810. 

1810-1820. 

1820-1830. 

1830-1840. 

Western  New  York . 

Western  Pennsylvania  . 

Ohio  . 

149-8 

81.9 

344-0 

47-0 

408.6 

334-6 

250.9 

34-6 

I5I-9 

500.2 

349-1 

84.0 

219.2 

53-4 

35-4 

61.3 

133-0 

185.4 

260.9 

III.O 

34-7 

37-9 

62.0 

99.9 

202.4 

570.9 
173- 1 

Indiana  . 

Illinois  . 

Michigan  . 

Missouri  . 

Wisconsin  . 

Town  . 

Summary  . 

I4I-3 

148.4 

129.8 

68.0 

81.8 

ordinance  of  1785  was  laid  the  foundation  of  the  American  public  land  policy. 
The  now  familiar  system  of  rectangular  surveys  was  established  by  this  ordi¬ 
nance.  Land  was  to  be  sold  either  by  whole  townships  or  by  lots  (“  sections  ”) 
of  1  mile  square,  at  a  minimum  price  of  $1  per  acre.  The  receipts  from  sales 
under  this  ordinance  proved  disappointing,  and  Congress,  being  in  urgent 
need  of  funds,  reverted  to  the  policy  of  the  colonial  governments  and  agreed 
to  the  sale  of  several  large  tracts  to  land  companies,  notably  the  Ohio  and 


PIONEERING  WEST  OF  THE  ALLEGHENIES 


153 


Scioto  Companies.  The  sales  to  these  companies  and  to  other  large  purchasers 
in  the  years  1787  and  1788  amounted  to  about  1,500,000  acres,  for  which 
Congress  received  $839,203  in  its  own  depreciated  currency  and  securities. 
Such  transactions,  although  out  of  line  with  our  general  land  policy,  did 
nevertheless  bring  money  into  the  treasury  when  it  was  badly  needed  and 
\\  ere  instrumental  in  getting  settlers  into  the  new  country. 

THE  CREDIT  SYSTEM. 

The  land  policy  as  laid  down  in  1785  was  further  developed  by  the  act  of 
1796,  which  reaffirmed  the  principle  of  rectangular  surveys,  and  raised  the 
minimum  price  to  $2  per  acre.  However,  by  extending  the  period  of  payment 
from  three  months  to  one  year  it  introduced  an  important  new  departure,  the 
credit  system.  In  1800  the  details  of  previous  acts  were  more  carefully 
worked  out.  The  minimum  price  of  $2  per  acre  was  retained,  but  the  minimum 
tract  which  might  be  purchased  was  reduced  to  320  acres  (in  the  district  west 
of  the  Muskingum  River).  A  significant  extension  was  made  in  the  credit 
system.  The  purchaser  was  required  to  deposit  only  one-twentieth  of  the 
purchase  money,  exclusive  of  fees  and  surveying  expenses,  and  then  was  given 
40  days  to  make  an  additional  payment  bringing  the  total  up  to  one-fourth. 

The  balance  of  the  price  was  divided  into  four  annual  payments  due  respectively 
two,  three  and  four  years  after  the  sale.  On  these  payments  interest  at  six  per  cent 
from  the  date  of  sale  ’  was  charged,  payable  as  they  became  due,  but  a  discount  of  eight 
per  cent,  from  the  amount  demandable  was  extended  for  prompt  payments  If  the  final 
payment  was  not  made  within  one  year  after  it  fell  due  the  tract  would  be  advertised 

for  thirty  days  and  sold  at  public  sale  for  a  price  not  less  than  the  whole  arrears  due 
plus  the  expenses  of  the  sale.”  4 

Says  Professor  Treat: 5 

Under  the  Act  of  1800  the  land  system  became  a  real  factor  in  the  westward  move¬ 
ment,  and  it  was  the  five-year  credit  period  which  rendered  the  act  effective.  Without 
the  credit  little  land  could  be  sold  for  two  dollars  an  acre,  but  with  it  a  man  could  pay 
fifty  cents  an  acre  and  the  balance  within  five  years.  The  minimum  lot  was  now  reduced 
to  three  hundred  and  twenty  acres,  so  that  a  payment  of  one  hundred  and  sixty  dollars 
entitled  a  settler  to  the  use  of  a  half  section  pending  the  payment  of  the  balance- 

even  if  he  were  forced  to  forfeit  the  land  he  had  had  five  years’  occupation  for  that 
amount. 

Under  the  operation  of  this  act  about  I9,500>000  acres  of  public  land  were 
sold,  of  which  8,850,000  acres  were  in  Ohio,  2,500,000  acres  in  Indiana, 
1,600,000  acres  in  Illinois,  and  1,250,000  acres  in  Missouri.  For  the  20  years 
during  which  the  act  of  1800  regulated  the  sales  of  public  lands,  the  latter 
were  administered  from  the  financial  rather  than  from  the  social  point  of  view. 
That  is,  the  idea  of  deriving  revenue  from  the  public  domain  was  predomi¬ 
nant  over  the  idea  of  getting  the  land  as  speedily  as  possible  into  the  hands 
of  actual  settlers.  The  credit  system,  by  stimulating  speculative  purchases 
brought  large  revenues  to  the  national  treasury,  but  its  easy  terms  proved 
disastrous  to  many  settlers.  With  pioneer  optimism  they  purchased  as  much 
as  they  could  cover  on  the  first  payment,  trusting  to  earn  enough  to  cover 
the  second  installment  before  it  came  due,  or  hoping  that  rising  End  values 
would  make  the  sale  of  a  portion  of  the  tract  profitable. 


4  Treat,  The  National  Land  System,  05. 

5  Ibid.,  378. 


154 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


LAND  SPECULATION. 

Land  speculation  became  general.  Birbeck  c  wrote  in  1818  : 

«  Thp  merchant  invests  his  profits,  and  the  professional  man  his  savings,  in  the  pur- 
chase  of  un^Wvated  lands.  The  farmer,  instead  of  completing  the  improvement  of 
his  nresent  possessions,  lays  out  all  he  can  save  in  entering  more  land.  In  a  dis 
which  is  settling,  this  speculation  is  said  to  pay  on  the  average,  when  managed 

with  judgment,  fifteen  per  cent.  Who  then  will  submit  to  the  toils  of  agriculture,  ur  er 

than  bare  Necessity  requires,  for  fifteen  per  cent?  Or  who 

at  fifteen  per  cent,  where  he  can  obtain  that  interest  by  investing  it  in  land.  Ihus  every 
description  of  men,  almost  every  man,  is  poor  in  convertible  property. 

While  crops  were  good  and  prices  were  high  the  credit  system,  with  all 
its  faults,  was  a  helpful  method  of  enabling  capital-less  pioneers  to  get  con¬ 
trol  of  land.  But  its  dangers  in  a  period  of  poor  crops  and  falling  prices  were 
soon  obvious.  As  early  as  1804,  Secretary  Gallatin  advocated  the  abolition 
of  credit  but  his  advice  was  not  followed.  Petitions  began  to  pour  into  Con- 
nress  from  small  purchasers  who  were  unable  to  meet  their  payments,  praying 
for  an  extension  of  time  so  that  they  might  not  lose  their  homesteads  and 
investments.  Congress,  always  sympathetic  with  the  settler,  afforded  the 
desired  aid  in  a  succession  of  relief  acts  extending  the  period  of  forfeiture. 
Finally  in  1820,  Congress  took  the  bold  step  of  abolishing  the  credit  system 
altogether.  At  the  same  time  the  minimum  price  of  land  was  reduced  to 
$1.2=;  per  acre  and  purchasers  were  allowed  to  buy  as  little  as  80  acres.  Un  er 
these  provisions  a  settler  who  had  $100  in  cash  might  purchase  outng  it  an 
80-acre  farm,  but  under  the  credit  system  $100  would  have  been  little  more 
than  enough  to  meet  the  first  payment  on  the  smallest  tract  purchasable,  a 
quarter-section.  The  act  of  1820  marks  a  turning-point  in  our  land  policy , 
from  that  date  an  ever-increasing  emphasis  has  been  laid  on  adjusting  the  land 
laws  to  the  needs  of  the  settlers  and  nation’s  financial  needs  have  been 

secondary. 

PREEMPTION  ACTS. 

A  further  development  of  what  may  be  called  the  social  ideal  in  land  policy 
is  seen  in  the  series  of  acts  relating  to  preemption  which  were  passed  in  the 
years  1801  to  1841.  These  laws  granted  to  squatters,  1.  e.,  unauthorized  set¬ 
tlers  on  public  lands,  the  right,  when  such  lands  were  opened  to  entry  to 
purchase  at  the  minimum  price  in  advance  of  the  public  sale,  thus  affording 
protection  against  the  competition  of  speculators.  The  necessity  for  such  legis¬ 
lation  arose  from  the  unsystematic  and  unregulated  method  of  settlement. 
Settlement  did  not  wait  for  the  extension  of  the  land  system. 

“  Where  land  was  held  under  foreign  titles  the  period  of  confirmation  would  delay 
the  surveys  and  regular  sales  but  would  permit  of  speculation  and  some  increase  of 
population.  And  even  the  most  rapid  surveying  could  not  keep  up  with  the  land-hung  y 
settlers  who  preferred  to  squat  on  unsurveyed  land,  in  the  hope  of  securing  a  preei  p- 
tion,  rather  than  buy  inferior  land  at  the  minimum  price  or  pay  a  premium  for  the 
better  land  at  the  auction  sale.  The  surveyors  had  to  run  their  lines  over  good,  bad  and 
indifferent  land.  The  squatters  would  locate  only  on  the  best.  For  that  reason  th 
surveys  could  not,  even  if  money  were  available,  keep  pace  with  the  settlers.  While  the 
linesmen  were  struggling  through  some  morass  or  thicket  the  squatters  were  rinS1”® 
trees  along  a  likely  river  bottom.  Therefore  a  map  of  the  extension  of  the  surveys  wou  d 
not  agree  with  a  map  of  the  population  of  the  public  land  states  For  people  woold 
be  settled  on  unsurveyed  land  and  considerable  surveyed  land  would  still  be  unsold. 


6  Letters  from  Illinois,  85. 


7  Treat,  National  Land  System,  162. 


PIONEERING  WEST  OF  THE  ALLEGHENIES 


155 


SIGNIFICANCE  OF  THE  RECOGNITION  OF 
PREEMPTION  RIGHTS. 

The  recognition  of  preemption  rights  of  squatters  antedates  the  national 
land  system.  As  early  as  the  middle  of  the  eighteenth  century  it  was  a  well- 
recognized  feature  of  the  land  system  of  colonial  Pennsylvania,  and  was  in¬ 
corporated  in  the  earliest  legislation  for  the  disposal  of  unoccupied  lands  after 
the  colony  had  become  a  state. s  In  Congress  the  principle  of  preemption 
was  recognized  as  early  as  I79°>  although  no  acts  of  a  general  nature  were 
passed  until  1803.  The  delay  of  surveys  in  Michigan  and  in  Illinois  led  to 

preemption  being  granted  by  general  acts  to  settlers  in  those  territories  in  1808 
and  1813. 

“  By  1820,  ....  Congress  had  recognized  squatting  to  the  extent  of  granting  some 
measure  of  preemption  to  everyone  of  the  public  land  States  and  territories  save  In- 
chana  .  .  From  1820  to  1841  the  representatives  of  the  public  land  States  urged  the 
desirability  of  a  general  preemption  act.  Beginning  in  1830,  temporary  preemption  laws, 
covering  a  limited  period  but  of  a  general  nature,  were  passed.  Finally,  in  1841  a 
general  preemption  law  was  enacted  and  the  long  struggle  of  the  pioneer  for  recognition 
and  tor  the  right  to  reap  the  reward  of  his  enterprise  was  won.” 8  9 

The  recognition  of  the  right  of  preemption  was  not  equivalent  to  a  free 
grant.  Phe  squatteis  must  still  buy  their  lands.  The  enactment  of  preemption 
laws,  however,  established  the  principle  that  actual  settlers  should  have  prior 
rights  over  all  other  purchasers. 

Technically,  the  squatter  throughout  this  period  had  been  a  lawbreaker. 
Congress  in  1787  had  twice  ordered  its  troops  to  move  against  unauthorized 
settlers  who  were  locating  on  the  public  lands.  Western  lands  then  being  re¬ 
garded  as  a  source  of  revenue,  they  might  not  be  taken  up  by  land-hungry 
settlers,  and  in  1807  strict  laws  were  passed  prohibiting  unauthorized  settle¬ 
ment.  But  the  preemption  idea  gained  strength  with  the  increasing  impor¬ 
tance  of  western  settlement.  In  this  case,  as  in  dealing  with  the  credit  system, 
Congress  showed  a  lack  of  consistent  policy.  It  proved  more  and  more  sym¬ 
pathetic  with  the  point  of  view  of  the  pioneers.  The  squatter  came  to  be 
regarded  not  as  a  lawbreaker  but  as  a  model  of  public  virtue.  His  bravery  and 
self-sacrifice  in  clearing  land  and  making  a  home  in  a  new  country  were  ac¬ 
counted  of  greater  importance  than  his  trespass  in  crossing  the  legal  frontier. 
The  strict  theory  of  the  land  system  demanded  that  he  be  evicted,  without 
compensation  for  improvements,  and  that  his  land  be  sold  to  the  highest 
bidder.  But  in  practice,  even  in  the  absence  of  preemption  laws,  the  squatter 
wras  protected  by  the  public  sentiment  of  the  frontier  community.  It  demanded 
that  the  purchaser  of  his  land  should  compensate  him  for  his  improvements 
and  at  times  was  strong  enough  to  protect  him  from  competition  at  the 
public  sale  and  secure  him  a  virtual  preemption  right  at  the  minimum  price.10 

8  See  p.  72. 

9  Treat,  op.  cit.,  385,  386. 

10  The  facts  in  the  above  discussion  of  the  federal  land  policy  have  been  taken  prin¬ 

cipally  from  Professor  Treat’s  monograph  quoted  above.  The  author  has  also 
consulted  Sato,  The  Land  Question  in  the  United  States  in  J.  H.  U.  Studies 
in  Historical  and  Political  Science,  IV,  Nos.  7-9  (1886);  Donaldson,  The 
Public  Domain,  and  Callender,  Economic  History  of  the  United  States,  chs  XII 
and  XIII. 


156  AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 

THE  FACTORS  DETERMINING  AGRICULTURAL  DEVELOP¬ 
MENT  OF  THE  OHIO  VALLEY. — THE  CHARACTER 
OF  THE  PIONEER  POPULATION. 

Besides  the  legal  and  political  institutions  discussed  above  there  were  three 
sets  of  conditions  which  determined  the  development  of  agriculture  in  the 
great  district  drained  by  the  Ohio  and  its  tributaries :  ( i )  the  characteristics 
of  the  emigrants  themselves;  (2)  the  physical  environment,  and  (3)  economic 
conditions.  As  regards  the  characteristics  of  the  settlers  little  need  be  said. 
They  had  the  typical  pioneer  virtues  and  defects,  dhey  were  self-reliant  and 
impatient  of  control  to  the  point  of  lawlessness,  and  were  more  disposed  to 
fitful  violent  exertions  than  to  steady,  unremitting  application  to  farming. 
In  their  racial  origins  they  combined  all  the  elements  represented  in  the 
original  settlements  on  the  Atlantic  coast,  but  in  the  pioneer  stage  local  preju¬ 
dices  were  still  strong  enough  to  prevent  much  amalgamation  by  intermar¬ 
riage.  The  antagonism  between  New  Englanders  and  the  emigrants  from  Vir¬ 
ginia  and  North  Carolina  was  particularly  marked.11 

PHYSICAL  FEATURES  OF  THE  DISTRICT  OF 

THE  OHIO  VALLEY. 

On  crossing  the  mountains,  the  pioneers  entered  a  region  admirably  adapted 
bv  nature  for  the  development  of  a  thriving  agricultural  industry.  Its 
abundant  rainfall  and  the  long,  warm  summers  fitted  it  for  the  principal  cereal 
crops,  particularly  maize.  In  soil  and  configuration  there  were  great  differ¬ 
ences  in  various  parts  of  the  great  region  drained  by  the  Ohio  and  its  tribu¬ 
taries.  In  the  mountainous  districts  of  southwest  Virginia,  western  Virginia, 
western  North  Carolina,  eastern  Tennessee,  and  eastern  Kentucky  tillage  was 
practicable  only  in  the  broad  valleys  between  the  greater  ridges.  In  the  un¬ 
glaciated  region  south  of  the  Ohio  river  in  Kentucky  and  Tennessee  there 
are  sharp  contrasts  in  soils.  Where  the  earth  is  underlaid  with  coal  measures, 
as  in  eastern  Kentucky  and  in  central  Tennessee,  the  soils  are  usually  thin 
and  unfertile,  but  where  the  limestones  appear  at  the  sui  face  the  soil  immedi¬ 
ately  takes  on  an  exceedingly  fertile  character.  Such  a  region  is  the  famous 
bluegrass  region  of  Kentucky,  so  named  from  the  luxuriance  with  which  the 
species  of  grasses  belonging  to  the  genus  Poa  flourish  there.  In  the  region 
north  of  the  Ohio,  the  district  with  which  this  essay  is  chiefly  concerned, 
glacial  action  had  produced  soils  of  remarkable  fertility  and  endurance.  Over 
a  level  surface  of  sedimentary  rocks  the  ice-sheets  had  deposited  a  smooth, 
thick  mantle  of  finely  divided  silt  and  boulder  clay.  On  this  as  a  subsoil 
decaying  vegetable  matter  had  accumulated  for  centuries  with  little  loss  from 
erosion.  The  pioneers  in  this  region  had,  then,  two  advantages  over  their  kins¬ 
men  east  of  the  mountains ;  their  soils  were  better  and  their  fields,  owing  to 
their  smoothness  and  lack  of  stones,  were  more  easily  tilled.12 


11  See  Hubbard,  Family  Memories,  68;  Harris,  Journal,  58.  .  , 

12  The  discussion  of  physiography  in  this  and  following  paragraphs  is  from  bnaler, 

United  States,  I,  ch.  iii;  Brigham,  Geographical  Influences  in  American  History, 
chs.  iii-v,  and  Bowman,  Forest  Physiography,  486-491. 


157 


PIONEERING  WEST  OF  THE  ALLEGHENIES 

NATURAL  CLEARINGS  OR  TREELESS  PLAINS. 

A  natural  feature  of  great  importance  to  the  pioneer  was  the  presence  or 
absence  of  forestation.  Ihe  pioneer  agriculture  of  the  seventeenth  and 
eighteenth  centuries  had  been  woodland  agriculture,  and  a  large  part  of  the 
activities  of  the  first  generation  of  settlers  had  been  devoted  to  chopping  trees 
and  burning  logs.  It  is  important  to  remember  that  the  early  pioneers  west  of 
the  Alleghenies  were  engaged  in  just  this  type  of  farming.  On  crossing  the 
mountains  they  emerged  not  on  the  prairies,  but  on  broad,  heavily-wooded 
plateaus  sloping  gently  to  the  broad  plain  of  the  Mississippi  Valley  on  the 
west,  and  northwest  to  the  basin  of  the  Great  Lakes.  Extending  on  a  broad 
belt  across  western  New  York  and  Pennsylvania  and  covering  all  of  Ohio 
and  perhaps  seven-eighths  of  Indiana,  these  plateaus  and  the  equally  well 
wooded  river  valleys  that  dissected  them  were  the  scene  of  the  typical  western 
agriculture  of  the  years  1790  to  1840.  Illinois  is  the  first  prairie  State  east  of 
the  Mississippi,  but,  for  reasons  discussed  below,  there  was  until  about  1830 
little  prairie  farming  in  that  State. 

The  plateaus  were  not  entirely  forest-covered.  The  natural  openings  or 
treeless  meadows  which  were  so  welcome  a  sight  to  the  earliest  arrivals  on 
the  Atlantic  Coastal  Plain  seem  to  have  been  even  more  numerous  and  cer¬ 
tainly  more  extensive  on  the  western  slopes  of  the  Appalachian  Range.  Chris¬ 
topher  Gist,13  who  was  one  of  the  first  to  explore  and  describe  the  new 
region,  wrote  when  near  the  present  site  of  Circleville :  “  All  the  way  from 
Licking  Creek  to  this  Place  is  fine  rich  level  Land,  with  large  Meadows, 
Clover  Bottoms  &  spacious  Plains  covered  with  Wild  Rye . ”  Hutch¬ 

ins,14  who  traversed  the  region  a  quarter  of  a  century  later,  wrote : 

On  the  north-west  and  south-east  sides  of  the  Ohio,  below  the  great  Kanhaway 
river,  at  a  little  distance  from  it,  are  extensive  natural  meadows,  or  savannas.  These 
meadows  are  from  20  to  50  miles  in  circuit.  They  have  many  beautiful  groves  of  trees 
interspersed  as  if  by  art  in  them,  and  which  serve  as  a  shelter  for  the  innumberable 
herds  of  buffalo,  deer,  &c.  with  which  they  abound.” 

Manas seh  Cutler,  in  his  Description  of  Ohio  (1788), 15  describes  the  plains 
or  meadows  in  much  the  same  language,  but  applies  the  typically  western 
word  “  prairies  ”  to  them.  It  is  evident,  however,  that  he  did  not  mean  true 
prairies,  for  he  adds :  “  There  is  no  undergrowth  on  them  and  the  trees  which 
grow  very  high  and  become  very  large  only  need  to  be  deprived  of  their  bark 
in  order  to  become  fit  for  use.” 

In  the  Genessee  country  in  western  New  York  treeless  plains  were  a  feature 
so  striking  as  to  demand  explanation. 

The  openings,  or  large  tracts  of  land,  found  frequently  in  this  country  free  of 
timber,  and  showing  great  signs  of  having  been  once  in  a  state  of  cultivation,  are  singu¬ 
larly  curious.  This  sort  of  land,  from  the  ignorance  of  the  first  settlers  in  regard  to 
its  quality,  was  supposed  to  be  barren,  and  was  therefore  little  valued:  necessity, 
however,  obliged  some  to  attempt  the  cultivation  of  it,  and  they  were  agreeably  disap¬ 
pointed  on  finding  they  had  got  a  good  crop,  and  in  numberless  instances  they  have  con¬ 
tinued  to  reap  plentiful  crops  every  year  for  seven  years  past.  This  kind  of  land,  which, 


13  Journal  (1751),  in  Filson  Club  Publications,  No.  13  (1898),  p.  122.  See  also  pp.  133, 

145,  146-  . 

14  Topographical  Description,  in  Imlay,  Western  Territory  (3d  ed.,  1707),  p.  402. 

0  In  Ohio  Arch,  and  Hist.  Soc.  Publications,  III,  87. 


158 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


six  years  ago  would  not  have  sold  for  a  quarter  of  a  dollar  an  acre,  is  now  reckoned 
cheap  at  ten  dollars  an  acre.  It  is  difficult  to  account  for  these  openings,  or  for  the  open 
flats  on  the  Genesee  River,  where  ten  thousand  acres  may  be  found  in  one  body,  not 
even  encumbered  with  a  bush,  but  covered  with  grass  of  such  height,  that^the  largest 
bullocks,  at  thirty  feet  from  the  path,  will  be  completely  hid  from  the  view.”  16 

The  pasturage  afforded  on  the  openings  and  prairies  of  the  Allegheny  plateau 
was  a  natural  resource  of  great  importance  which  merits  detailed  discussion 
later  in  this  chapter.17 

WOODLAND  VS.  PRAIRIE  FARMING. 

The  tendency  to  neglect  the  openings,  except  for  pasturage,  and  to  clear 
woodland  for  tillage  instead,  was  later  strongly  shown  when  the  emigrants 
came  into  contact  with  the  actual  prairie  in  Indiana  and  Illinois.  It  seems 
illogical  at  first  glance  that  they  should  have  preferred  to  spend  years  of 
arduous  toil  in  clearing  woodland  when  fertile,  unforested  plains  lay  ready 
for  the  plow.  But,  taking  everything  into  consideration,  it  would  have  been 
remarkable  had  they  acted  otherwise.  For  almost  two  centuries  Americans 
had  been  pioneering  in  the  forests,  and  clearing  woodland  had  become  a 
national  habit.  The  processes  of  girdling,  grubbing,  log-rolling,  and  burning, 
and  the  construction  of  log  houses  represented  a  considerable  body  of  tech¬ 
nical  knowledge,  some  of  it  committed  to  writing,18  but  mostly  handed  down 
orally  from  one  generation  to  another.  In  this  technique  of  woodland  farming 
the  principles  of  soil  selection  according  to  the  character  of  the  forest  cover 
held  an  important  place.19  In  general,  a  heavy  growth  of  hardwood  was  re¬ 
garded  as  evidence  of  a  “  strong  ”  soil.  The  prairies  grew  no  timber,  their 
soils,  therefore,  were  regarded  with  suspicion. 

Moreover,  forests  were  of  great  importance  in  pioneer  economy.  They 
sheltered  the  game  on  which  the  backwoodsman  and  his  family  relied  for 
meat.  They  gave  him  the  logs  for  his  house,  fuel  for  cooking  and  heating,  and 
material  for  fencing  and  for  the  construction  of  a  great  variety  of  household 
furnishings  and  farm  tools. 

“  Not  to  speak  of  wooden  houses,  bridges,  and  roads— of  wood  for  fuel  and  fencing— 
we  find  it  adopted  in  the  west  for  purposes  more  anomalous,  where  wooden  pins  are 
substituted  for  nails,  and  wells  are  curbed  with  hollow  logs,  where  the  cabin  door 
swinging  on  wooden  hinges,  is  fastened  with  a  wooden  latch,  and  the  smoke  escapes 

through  a  wooden  chimney . Well  may  ours  be  called  a  wooden  country;  not 

merely  from  the  extent  of  its  forests,  but  because  in  common  use  wood  has  been 
substituted  for  a  number  of  the  most  necessary  and  common  articles — such  as  stone, 
iron,  and  even  leather.”  20 

Water  was  another  essential  for  family  consumption  and  for  the  settler’s 
livestock.  The  rivers  furnished  a  cheap  means  of  getting  farm  products  to 
market  at  a  time  when  land  carriage  for  any  distance  was  prohibitorily  ex- 


16  Description  of  the  Genesee  Country  ( 1799 ),  in  O’Callaghan,  Documentary  History 

of  New  York,  II,  ii47*  See  also  Ibid.,  II,  1107,  1132. 

17  Below,  pp.  159  et  seq. 

18  As  in  Dwight’s  Travels,  Belknap’s  New  Hampshire,  and  Lorain’s  Nature  and  Reason 

Harmonized,  chap.  33.  See  references  on  pages  77  and  78. 

19  Cooper,  Guide  in  the  Wilderness  (1810),  pp.  34-36* 

20  Hall,  Statistics  of  the  West  (1836),  p.  101. 


PIONEERING  WEST  OF  THE  ALLEGHENIES  159 

pensive.  The  desire  to  be  near  watercourses  was,  then,  an  additional  reason  for 
avoiding  the  prairies  and  for  the  continuance  of  woodland  farming. 

Finally,  prairie  farming  required  more  capital 21  than  woodland  farming 
and  with  capital  the  early  settlers  in  the  Ohio  Valley  were  not  well  supplied. 
Breaking  up  the  tough  sod  of  the  prairie  required  three  or  four  yoke  of 
oxen  and  a  heavy  plough.  When  first  broken  up  the  soil  yielded  only  a  small 
crop,  in  fact  it  was  often  allowed  to  lie  fallow  over  one  season  until  the  grass 
roots  had  thoroughly  rotted.  Consequently  capital  in  the  form  of  living  sup¬ 
plies  was  essential  on  the  prairie.  In  the  woods,  on  the  other  hand,  equipped 
only  with  an  axe  and  a  hoe,  the  pioneer  might  grub  out  the  underbrush,  girdle 
the  trees,  plant  corn,  and  have  a  good  crop  the  first  year.  Breaking  up  the 
prairies  did,  indeed,  cost  less  per  acre  in  terms  of  manual  labor,  but  it  cost 
more  in  terms  of  the  labor  of  draft  animals,  horses,  and  oxen.22 

NATIVE  GRASSES. 

The  rich  native  pasturage  of  the  region  west  of  the  Alleghenies  was  an 
environmental  advantage  of  first  importance  to  the  pioneers.  The  ease  with 
which  their  small  herds  found  sustenance  in  the  natural  openings  and  river 
bottoms  and  the  rapidity  with  which  they  matured  and  multiplied  were  cir¬ 
cumstances  which  lightened  the  unavoidable  hardships  of  frontier  farming. 
In  addition  to  the  wild  rye  and  andropogons  which  grew  here  much  more  luxu¬ 
riantly  than  along  the  Atlantic  coast,  the  first  arrivals  found  white  clover  and 
Kentucky  bluegrass.  Gist  mentioned  both  of  these  grasses  frequently  as  grow¬ 
ing  in  Kentucky,  and  Ohio.23  There  seems  no  doubt  of  the  accuracy  of  his 
observations,  which  are  supported  by  accounts  of  later  observers.24  The  pres¬ 
ence  of  these  grasses  in  advance  of  settlement  gave  rise  to  the  belief  that  they 
were  indigenous.  “The  white  clover,”  wrote  Johnson25  “appears  to  be  a 
natural  grass  of  the  country;  for,  although  never  sowed,  it  covers  every  field 
and  roadside,  where  the  land  has  been  neglected.” 

Recent  researches,  however,  have  shown  that  both  the  white  clover  and 
Kentucky  bluegrass  spread  by  natural  dissemination  from  the  Atlantic  Coast, 
or  perhaps  were  carried  into  the  Ohio  Valley  by  the  French  missionaries  and 
traders  from  Canada.26  As  soon  as  clearings  had  been  made  and  cattle  turned 
out  to  graze  the  bluegrass  and  clover  appeared  with  surprising  rapidity. 

A  new  species  of  forage  was  the  cane  which  was  found  along  the  borders 
of  the  rivers  in  Southern  Ohio,  Kentucky,  and  Missouri. 


21  See  Faux,  in  Thwaite’s  Early  Western  Travels,  XI,  256,  289.  Flagg,  in  Illinois  State 

Hist.  Soc.  Transactions  (1910),  p.  157. 

22  This  was  pointed  out. by  Faux,  in  Thwaite’s  Early  Western  Travels,  XI,  256.  See  also 

Ibid.,  289;  Flagg,  in  Illinois  State  Hist.  Soc.  Transactions,  1910,  p.  157;  Woods, 
Illinois  Country  (1819),  p.  230;  Adams,  in  Mich.  Pol.  Sci.  Assn.  Publications,  III 
(1899),  No.  7,  p.  12.  Lippincott,  in  Journal  of  Political  Economy,  XVIII  276, 
note  23. 

23  Journal,  123,  133,  146,  in  Filson  Club  Publications,  No.  13. 

24  See  Imlay’s  Western  Territory,  29,  233,  318;  Rev.  James  Smith,  in  Ohio  Arch,  and 

Hist.  Soc.  Quarterly,  XVI,  379;  Welby,  in  Thwaite’s  Early  Western  Travels, 
XII,  218. 

25  Letters  from  Pennsylvania,  75-  See  also  Cooper,  Guide  in  the  Wilderness,  36.  Maude, 

Visit  to  Niagara,  24,  41. 

26  See  Carrier  and  Bort,  in  American  Society  of  Agronomy,  Journal,  VIII  (1916),  p.  265. 


160 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


"  The  cane  is  a  reed  that  grows  to  the  height  frequently  of  fifteen  or  sixteen  feet,  but 
more  generally  about  ten  or  twelve  feet,  and  is  in  thickness  from  the  size  of  a  goose- 
quill  to  that  of  two  inches  diameter;  sometimes,  yet  seldom,  it  is  larger.  When  it  is 
slender,  it  never  grows  higher  than  from  four  to  seven  feet;  it  shoots  up  in  one  summer, 
but  produces  no  leaves  until  the  following  year.  It  is  an  evergreen,  and  is,  perhaps,  the 
most  nourishing  food  for  cattle  upon  earth.  No  other  milk  or  butter  has  such  flavour 
and  richness  as  that  which  is  produced  from  cows  which  feed  upon  cane. 

Hall,28  writing  in  1836,  remarked: 

“  The  first  settlers  find  them  [the  cane  brakes]  very  valuable,  as  affording  food  for 
their  cattle  during  the  winter ;  and  even  after  the  country  has  been  many  years  settled, 
the  inhabitants  drive  their  cattle  to  the  cane  in  the  autumn,  and  suffer  them  to  remain 
without  any  further  attention  until  the  ensuing  spring.  The  cane,  however,  is  genera  y 
destroyed  in  a  few  years,  by  the  large  number  of  cattle  which  are  thus  wintered  upon  it. 
Cattle  and  horses  eat  it  greedily,  and  will  stray  several  miles  in  search  of  this  favori  e 
food,  which  is  said  to  be  very  nourishing.” 

In  the  natural  clearings,  both  the  smaller  openings  and  the  more  extensive 
prairies,  the  natural  vegetation  furnished  abundant  and  nutritious  forage.  Hall 
described  two  kinds  of  prairie  grass.  The  first  was  evidently  a  wild  rye  or  one 
of  the  andropogons,  which,  in  the  summer,  he  says, 

“  soon  assumes  a  golden  hue,  and  waves  in  the  wind  like  a  ripe  harvest .  In  the 

low,  wet  prairies,  where  the  substratum  of  clay  lies  near  the  surface,  the  centre  of 
main  stem  of  this  grass,  which  bears  the  seed,  acquires  great  thickness,  and  shoots  up 
to  the  height  of  eight  or  nine  feet,  throwing  out  a  few  long  coarse  leaves  or  blades, 
and  the  traveler  often  finds  it  higher  than  his  head  as  he  rides  through  it  on  horseback. 
The  plants,  although  numerous  and  standing  close  together,  appear  to  grow  singly  and 
unconnected,  the  whole  force  of  the  vegetative  power  expanding  itself  upward.  But 
in  the  rich  undulating  prairies,  the  grass  is  finer,  with  less  of  stalk,  and  a  greater  pro¬ 
fusion  of  leaves.  The  roots  spread  and  interweave  so  as  to  form  a  compact  even  sod, 
and  the  blades  expand  into  a  close  thick  sward,  which  is  seldom  more  than  eighteen 
inches  high,  and  often  less,  until  late  in  the  season,  when  the  seed-bearing  stem 
shoots  up.”  29 

The  latter  type  of  prairie  grass  included,  among  others,  two  indigenous 
species  not  known  east  of  the  Alleghenies.  They  were  known  as  buffalo  grass 
and  buffalo  clover. 

BUFFALO  GRASS  AND  BUFFALO  CLOVER. 

The  latter,  one  of  the  native  clovers,  was  described  as  resembling  English 
clover  but  larger.  The  buffalo  grass  was  a  coarse  grass  with  a  broad  leaf. 
It  was  a  member  of  the  same  family  as  the  famous  buffalo  grass  which  was 
later  so  important  in  the  development  of  the  range  and  ranch  cattle  industries 
on  the  Great  Plains.  Unlike  the  wild  rye,  it  made  nutritious  hay  as  well  as 
good  green  forage.30 

The  disappearance  of  the  native  grasses  with  the  progress  of  clearing  and 
cultivation  was  a  matter  of  frequent  comment.  The  white  clover  and  Kentucky 


27  Imlay,  Western  Territory  (3d  ed.,  i797)»  P-  29-  .  .  .  _  . 

28  Statistics  of  the  West ,  26.  See  also  F.  A.  Michaux’s  description  in  Thwaite  s  tarty 

Western  Travels,  III,  94* 

29  Statistics  of  the  West,  74.  .  ... 

30  American  Museum,  V  (1788),  p.  591  Woods,  Illinois  Country,  198;  Atwater,  Ohio,  92, 

Imlay,  Western  Territory,  233. 


PIONEERING  WEST  OF  THE  ALLEGHENIES 


161 


blucgrass  spread  or  volunteered  ”  in  the  new  region  with  remarkable  rapidity. 
Birkbeck 31  commented  on  this  fact  with  keen  intelligence.  He  said : 

“  The  natural  turf,  in  those  spots  where  the  shade  is  not  too  deep  to  allow  a  turf  to 
be  formed,  is  composed  chiefly  of  annual  grasses,  or  of  such  as  wither  down  to  the  root 
in  autumn:  yet  the  perennial  or  evergreen  species,  which  clothe  the  rich  pastures  of 
more  northern  climates  with  perpetual  verdure,  thrive  here  to  admiration  when  sown 
even  casually,  and  take  entire  possession  of  the  soil,  to  the  exclusion  of  the  indigenous 
grasses  Where  the  little  caravans  have  encamped  as  they  crossed  the  prairies,  and  have 
given  their  cattle  hay  made  of  these  perennial  grasses,  there  remains  ever  after  a  spot  of 
green  turf  for  the  instruction  and  encouragement  of  future  improvers — a  fact  which, 
I  think,  is  conclusive  against  the  prevailing  notion  that  the  natural  grasses,  as  they  are 
called,  are  the  best  adapted  to  every  soil  and  climate.” 


^  d he  cultivation  of  timothy  and  red  clover  had  been  begun  in  western  New 
York  and  Pennsylvania  by  some  of  the  earliest  settlers.  In  Indiana  and  Illi¬ 
nois  a  few  experiments  had  been  made  before  1840  with  cultivated  grasses  in 
order  to  insuie  laige  cattle  raisers  against  failure  of  the  native  herbage.32 

^Utters  from  Illinois,  38.  See  also  Flint,  Mississippi  Valley,  II,  128;  Bradbury  in 
Thwaite  s  Early  Western  Travels,  V,  294. 

82  Description  of  the  Genesee  Country,  in  O’Callaghan,  Documentary  History  of  N.  Y., 
It,  1148,  Maude,  Visit  to  Niagara,  41,  72;  Johnson,  Letters  from  Pennsylvania,  74; 
Peck,  New  Guide  for  Emigrants,  277;  Wood,  Illinois  Country,  200:  Ellsworth, 
Valley  of  the  Upper  Wabash,  38. 


12 


Chapter  XII. — Pioneer  Farming  in  the  West. 

Economic  Conditions. 

The  outstanding  characteristics  of  the  farm  economy  of  the  early  settle¬ 
ments  were  ;  ( i )  the  extensive  character  of  the  enterprise,  that  is,  the  applica¬ 
tion  of  small  amounts  of  labor  and  capital  on  large  amounts  of  land,  and  (2) 
self-sufficiency,  or  production  for  consumption  and  not  for  sale. 

An  English  traveler  1  acutely  observed  of  the  western  settlements : 

«  Quantity  of  acres  of  produce  is  here  thought  to  be  of  much  greater  importance  than 
quantity  per  acre.  The  great  object  is  to  have  as  many  acres  as  possible  cleared,  ploughed, 
set,  sown,  planted,  and  managed  by  as  few  hands  as  possible ;  there  being  little  capital, 
and  therefore  little  or  none  to  spare  for  hired  labour.  Instead  of  five  acres  well-managed, 
they  must  have  20  acres  badly  managed.  It  is  not  how  much  corn  can  be  raised  on  an 
acre,  but  how  much  from  one  hand  or  man,  the  land  being  nothing  in  comparison  with 

labour.” 

In  these  sentences  Faux  calls  attention  to  one  of  the  outstanding  features  of 
pioneer  farm  economy,  its  extensiveness.  Capital  and  labor,  being  scarce,  were 
spread  thin  over  large  tracts  of  land,  which  was  cheap.  We  have  already  dis¬ 
cussed  the  terms  upon  which  land  could  be  secured ; 2  let  us  now  examine  the 
pioneer’s  capital  equipment  and  his  labor  force. 


SCARCITY  OF  CAPITAL  GOODS. 


Lack  of  capital  and  the  lack  of  a  market,  cheap  land  and  dear  labor  were 
the  determining  economic  conditions  of  pioneer  farming  in  the  Ohio  Valley 
as  they  had  been  in  the  back  country  of  colonial  times.  The  emigrant  took 
little  equipment  with  him  into  the  wilderness — an  axe,  a  gun,  a  few  household 
goods,  a  cow,  a  yoke  of  oxen  or  a  horse,  a  few  sheep,  and  pigs.  His  farm 
implements,  the  bull-plough,  the  wooden  cart  with  solid  wheels,  the  V-shaped, 
wooden-toothed  harrow,  the  sickle  and  later  the  cradle  with  which  he  har¬ 
vested  his  wheat  and  small  grain,  his  flail,  fan  and  sieve  used  in  threshing 
and  cleaning,  his  hoes  and  forks,  all  were  constructed  principally  of  wood 
with  iron  parts  secured  from  the  local  blacksmith.  Farm  buildings  were  not 
numerous.  Barns  were  few,  more  numerous  were  corn-cribs  and  shelters  for 
work  horses.  Hay  and  straw  were  stacked  and  foddered  out  of  doors.  Cattle, 
pigs,  and  sheep  had  commonly  no  shelter  but  the  woods.3 


1  Faux,  in  Thwaite’s  Early  Western  Travels,  XI,  177 • 

2  Above,  pp.  151  et  seq.  . 

3  Farm  implements  and  their  use  are  described  in  Howells,  Recollections,  62,  154-150; 

Cockrum,  Pioneer  History  of  Indiana,  320-321 ;  Smith,  Indiana,  !,  351 ;  Beers,  Mont¬ 
gomery  County,  Ohio,  293;  Welker,  in  Western  Reserve  Hist.  Soc .  Tracts,  IV, 
No.  86,  p.  31;  Young,  Chautauqua  County ,  New  York,  85.  Flint,  in  Ihwaites 
Early  Western  Travels,  IX,  123,  gives  a  detailed  description  of  the  cradle  which  he 
found  in  use  in  Southern  Ohio,  1818-1820.  The  peculiar  carts  and  ploughs  used  by 
the  French  colonists  in  Illinois  are  described  by  Reynolds,  My  Own  Times,  22.  On 
farm  buildings  see  Illinois  State  Hist.  Soc.  Transactions  (1910),  p.  162;  Howells, 
Recollections,  1 18 ;  Wood,  Illinois  Country,  174;  Maine  Farmer,  V  (1837),  p.  220. 

162 


PIONEER  FARMING  IN  THE  WEST 


163 


After  the  middle  of  the  century  pioneering  took  on  a  more  capitalistic  form. 
When  the  development  of  southern  and  eastern  markets  and  of  internal  trans¬ 
portation  had  made  commercial  agriculture  possible  on  the  prairies,  the  new 
settlers  were  able  to  equip  themselves  by  borrowing  capital  from  older  com¬ 
munities.  But  while  farming  was  still  in  the  woodlands,  markets  were  unde¬ 
veloped  and  the  pioneer  farmer  had  to  create,  or  accumulate,  practically  all  of 
his  slender  stock  of  capital  by  his  own  labor. 

SCARCITY  OF  FARM  LABOR. 

The  routine  tasks  of  the  farm  were  performed  by  members  of  the  farm 
family.  In  the  newest  settlements  the  families  were  mostly  “  young,”  that  is, 
the  children  were  nearly  all  small.  In  such  families  the  farmer  did  most  of 
the  work  himself  with  the  help  of  one  or  two  big  boys.  His  wife,  and  perhaps 
an  older  daughter,  was  called  on  for  help  in  planting  and  hoeing  corn  and  to 
rake  grain  and  hay  at  harvest  time.  “  The  rule  was,  that  whoever  had  the 
strength  to  work,  took  hold  and  helped.  If  the  family  was  mostly  girls,  they 
regularly  helped  their  father  in  all  the  lighter  farm  work.”  4  In  addition  to 
occasional  field  work,  the  farm  women  regularly  cared  for  the  vegetable  garden 
and  the  poultry,  and  carried  on  besides  a  great  variety  of  industrial  pur¬ 
suits  indoors,  spinning,  knitting,  weaving,  and  making  clothing  both  for  them¬ 
selves  and  for  the  men-folks.  As  a  rule,  the  women  did  the  milking  and  made 
the  butter. 

“  Except  in  a  Yankee  family  no  man  or  boy  could  be  induced  to  milk  the  cows,  it 
being  regarded  as  woman’s  work.  But  wherever  a  New  Englander  was  found,  he  and 
the  boys  did  the  ‘pailing’  of  the  cows.”  5 * 7 

Slavery  had  been  prohibited  in  the  Northwest  Territory  by  the  ordinance  of 
l7&7>  nevertheless,  efforts  were  made  to  evade  its  provisions  and  negroes  were 
actually  held  in  servitude,  under  the  guise  of  indentured  servants,  in  southern 
Illinois  and  Indiana  until  about  1820.  This  was  not  surprising,  inasmuch  as 
the  early  settlements  in  these  States  were  made  by  slaveholders  from  Virginia 
and  Kentucky.  The  number  of  such  quasi-slaves  was  never  very  large;  in 
Indiana  in  1810  they  were  less  than  250,  out  of  a  total  population  of  24,500, 
and  in  Illinois  in  1818  they  numbered  about  800  in  a  total  of  40,000.® 

Free  white  labor  for  hire  was  almost  entirely  lacking  in  the  early  decades 
of  the  century.  The  children  of  poor  families  were  sometimes  “  bound  out  ” 
or  apprenticed  at  farm  work,  and  occasionally  a  farmer  might  employ  one  of 
the  poorer  emigrants  while  the  latter  was  earning  money  to  buy  land.  These 
were  few,  and  with  the  prevailing  high  rate  of  wages  and  cheapness  of  land 
they  did  not  long  remain  hired  hands.  An  English  traveler  in  Illinois  in  1818 
wrote : 

“A  man  used  to  work  will  earn  in  one  day  what  will  suffice  for  the  simple  wants  of 
a  Backwoodsman  a  whole  week.  If  he  be  sober  and  industrious,  in  two  years  he  can 
enter  a  quarter  section  of  land,  buy  a  horse,  a  plough,  and  tools.  The  lowest  price  for 
labour  now  is  13$  per  month  with  board  and  lodging.” 


*  Howells,  Recollections ,  156. 

5  Welker,  in  Western  Reserve  Hist.  Soc.  Tracts,  IV,  No.  86,  p.  qo. 

®  Esarev,  Indiana,  I,  197,  203;  Buck,  Illinois  in  1818,  pp.  138,  318^ 

7  Ogg,  Fordham’s  Personal  Narrative,  210. 


164  AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 

The  English  farmers,  Birkbeck,  Flower,  and  others,  who  came  to  Illinois 
with  plenty  of  capital,  expecting  to  carry  on  large-scale  farming,  found  their 
plans  upset  by  the  lack  of  a  class  of  farm  laborers.  At  first  they  attempted  to 
solve  the  difficulty  by  the  importation  of  English  laborers,  but  the  relief  was 
only  temporary,  for  the  new  arrivals  soon  were  affected  with  the  desire  to  be 
landowners.  Finally  the  English  were  “  forced  to  the  conclusion  that  Illinois 
was  a  good  location  only  for  the  small  farmer  who  was  willing  to  work  his  land 
without  hired  labor.”  8 


GROUP  COOPERATION. 

Habits  of  group  cooperation  were  brought  by  the  pioneers  from  their  east¬ 
ern  homes  across  the  mountains.  The  clearing  of  land  and  building  of  log 
houses,  reaping,  the  handling  of  flax,  corn-huskings,  the  picking  of  cotton, 
sewing,  and  quilting  were  all  accomplished  by  the  united  labor  force  of  a 
number  of  neighboring  families  and  were  made  occasions  for  recreation  and 
social  intercourse.  Bradbury  9  wrote : 

“  jt  is  necessary  to  remark,  that  in  the  early  part  of  the  settlement  of  a  country  like 
this,  a  great  number  of  things  occur  necessary  to  be  done,  which  require  the  united 
strength  of  numbers  to  effect.  In  those  parts,  money  cannot  purchase  for  the  new 
settler  the  required  aid;  but  that  kind  and  generous  feeling  which  men  have  for  each 
other,  who  are  not  rendered  callous  by  the  possession  of  wealth,  or  the  dread  of  poverty, 
comes  to  his  relief:  his  neighbours,  even  unsolicited,  appoint  a  day  when  as  a  frolic, 
they  shall,  for  instance,  build  him  a  house.  On  the  morning  of  the  appointed  day  they 
assemble,  and  divide  themselves  into  parties,  to  each  of  which  is  assigned  its  respective 
duty;  one  party  cuts  down  the  trees,  another  lops  and  cuts  them  to  proper  lengths,  a 
third’ is  furnished  with  horses  and  oxen,  and  drags  them  to  the  spot  designed  for  the 
scite  of  the  house:  another  party  is  employed  in  making  shingles  to  cover  the  roof, 
and  at  night  all  the  materials  are  ready  upon  the  spot;  and  on  the  night  of  the  next 
day,  he  and  his  family  sleep  in  their  new  habitation.  No  remuneration  is  expected,  nor 
would  it  be  received.  It  is  considered  the  performance  of  a  duty,  and  only  lays  him  under 
the  obligation  to  discharge  the  debt  by  doing  the  same  to  subsequent  settlers.  But  this 
combination  of  labour  in  numbers,  for  the  benefit  of  one  individual,  is  not  confined  to 
the  new  comer  only,  it  occurs  frequently  in  the  course  of  a  year  amongst  the  old 
settlers,  with  whom  it  is  a  continued  bond  of  amity  and  social  intercourse,  and  in  no 
part  of  the  world  is  good  neighbourship  found  in  greater  perfection  than  in  the  western 
territory,  or  in  America  generally.” 

SELF-SUFFICIENCY.— THE  LACK  OF  MARKETS. 

A  second  economic  characteristic  of  western  pioneer  farming  was  its  self- 
sufficiency,  that  is,  crops  and  livestock  were  produced  chiefly  for  farm  con¬ 
sumption  rather  than  for  sale.  Trade  in  farm  products,  as  we  shall  see,10  was 
not  entirely  absent  in  the  early  western  settlements.  Wheat  and  cattle,  potash 
and  lumber  were  exported  from  the  communities  in  western  New  York 
almost  immediately  after  their  settlement.  The  pioneers  in  the  Ohio  Valley 
had  begun  to  ship  flour,  pork,  whisky  and  tobacco  to  the  New  Orleans  market 
before  1800,  and  soon  after  that  date  the  first  cattle  were  driven  across  the 


8  See  Buck,  Illinois  in  1818,  p.  136,  and  sources  quoted  there. 

0  In  Thwaites,  Early  Western  Travels,  V,  282;  see  also  Howells,  Recollections,  145? 

Woods,  Illinois  Country,  203,  213. 

10  See  p.  169. 


PIONEER  FARMING  IN  THE  WEST 


165 


mountains  to  eastern  markets.  But  throughout  the  period  of  woodland  farm¬ 
ing  the  organization  of  the  farm  enterprise  was  determined  by  the  needs  of 
the  farm  family  and  not  by  market  conditions.  Crops  were  selected  and  ani¬ 
mals  were  raised  for  the  production  of  food  for  the  farm  needs.  Occasionally  a 
surplus  was  marketable  and  with  the  proceeds  a  small  amount  of  store  goods 
could  be  bought.  Otherwise,  the  farm  produced  all  that  the  farm  consumed. 
Self-sufficiency  was  a  uniform  characteristic  of  all  pioneer  settlements  west 
of  the  Alleghenies  from  western  New  York  to  Missouri. 

The  following  description  of  pioneer  farm  life  in  Illinois  would  apply 
equally  well  to  all  the  early  western  settlements: 11 

The  farmer  raised  his  own  provisions ;  tea  and  coffee  were  scarcely  used,  except 
on  some  grand  occasions.  The  farmer’s  sheep  furnished  wool  for  his  winter  clothing: 
he  raised  cotton  and  flax  for  his  summer  clothing.  His  wife  and  daughters  spun,  wove, 
and  made  it  into  garments.  A  little  copperas  and  indigo,  with  the  bark  of  trees,  fur¬ 
nished  dye  stuffs  for  coloring.  The  fur  of  the  raccoon,  made  him  a  hat  or  a  cap.  The 
skins  of  deer  or  of  his  cattle,  tanned  at  a  neighboring  tan-yard,  or  dressed  by  himself, 
made  him  shoes  or  moccasins.  Boots  were  rarely  seen,  even  in  the  towns.  And  a  log 
cabin,  made  entirely  of  wood,  without  glass,  nails,  hinges,  or  locks,  furnished  the  resi¬ 
dence  of  many  a  contented  and  happy  family.  The  people  were  quick  and  ingenious  to 
supply  by  invention,  and  with  their  own  hands,  the  lack  of  mechanics  and  artificers. 
Each  farmer,  as  a  general  thing,  built  his  own  house,  made  his  own  ploughs  and 
harness,  bedsteads,  chairs,  stools,  cupboards,  and  tables.  The  carts  and  wagons  for 
hauling,  were  generally  made  without  iron,  without  tires,  or  boxes,  and  were  run  with¬ 
out  tar,  and  might  be  heard  creaking  as  they  lumbered  along  the  roads,  for  the  distance 
of  a  mile  or  more.” 

PROGRESS  FROM  PIONEERING  TO  SETTLED  FARMING. 

To  describe  the  farming  operations  of  any  region  at  a  given  date  is  a 
formidable  task.  Differences  in  soil  and  in  the  intelligence,  energy,  and 
equipment  of  neighboring  farmers  make  generalization  difficult.  But  at  a 
time  when  rapid  changes  are  in  progress,  as  from  self-sufficient  to  commercial 
agriculture,  it  becomes  impossible  to  select  features  of  farm  practice  which 
can  be  considered  typical  or  normal  for  the  whole  area.  The  Ohio  Valley  was 
in  the  midst  of  such  a  transition  in  the  first  half  of  the  nineteenth  century. 
At  the  front  of  the  wave  of  settlement,  as  it  advanced  successively  over  west¬ 
ern  New  York  and  Pennsylvania,  Ohio,  Indiana,  and  Illinois,  there  were 
typical  frontier  conditions,  scattered  population,  rough  life,  lack  of  markets, 
and  primitive  agriculture.  As  the  wave  rolled  on  conditions  behind  it  changed 
rapidly.  Population  became  denser,  trails  changed  to  roads,  log  cabins  gave 
way  to  comfortable  houses,  clearings  became  farms,  ragged  villages  grew  into 
towns.  Distant  markets  became  accessible  by  improved  transportation  facili¬ 
ties,  chiefly  canals  in  this  period,  and  home  markets  developed  in  the  growing 
river  towns.  With  an  outlet  for  their  produce  thus  provided,  farmers  were 
stimulated  to  increase  production  by  more  careful  tillage  and  by  the  conserva¬ 
tion  of  manures.  They  built  better  barns  and  bought  improved  breeds  of 
cattle,  sheep,  and  swine.  And  so  in  a  comparatively  short  time  the  region  took 


11  Ford,  Illinois ,  41.  See  also  Young,  Chautauqua  County,  New  York,  89;  Howells, 
Recollections,  123-125 ;  Gottfried  Duden’s  Report  in  Mo.  Hist.  Review,  XII  ( 1 9 1 7— 
1918),  pp.  166,  175;  Welker,  in  Western  Reserve  Hist.  Soc.  Tracts,  IV,  No.  86,  pp. 
43-48;  Lippincott,  Pioneer  Industry,  in  Journal  of  Political  Economy,  XVIII  (1910), 
274,  280. 


166 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


on  the  prosperous  appearance  of  the  long-settled  communities  of  the  Eastern 
States.  Just  when  the  backwoods  life  disappeared  in  any  particular  State  can 
be  determined  only  by  exhaustive  research  in  local  history.  It  seems  safe  to 
say,  however,  that  by  1830  frontier  conditions  were  no  longer  typical  of  Ohio. 
A  corresponding  date  for  Indiana,  Illinois,  and  southern  Michigan  would  be, 

perhaps,  1850. 

The  changing  character  of  the  inhabitants  of  the  Middle  West  illustrates 
the  progress  from  pioneering  to  settled  farming.  The  Scotch  traveler,  James 

Flint,12  wrote : 

“  All  who  have  paid  attention  to  the  progress  of  new  settlements,  agree  in  stating, 
that  the  first  possession  of  the  woods  in  America,  was  taken  by  a  class  of  hunters, 
commonly  called  backwoodsmen.  These,  in  some  instances,  purchased  the  soil  from 
the  government,  and  in  others,  placed  themselves  on  the  public  lands  without  per¬ 
mission .  The  improvements  of  a  backwoodsman  are  usually  confined  to  building 

a  rude  log  cabin,  clearing  and  fencing  a  small  piece  of  ground  for  raising  Indian  corn. 
A  horse,  a  cow,  a  few  hogs,  and  some  poultry,  comprise  his  live-stock;  and  his  farther 
operations  are  performed  with  his  rifle.  The  formation  of  a  settlement  in  his  neighbour¬ 
hood  is  hurtful  to  the  success  of  his  favourite  pursuit,  and  is  the  signal  for  his  removing 
into  more  remote  parts  of  the  wilderness.  In  the  case  of  his  owning  the  land  on  which  he 
has  settled,  he  is  contented  to  sell  it  at  a  low  price,  and  his  establishment,  though  trifling, 
adds  much  to  the  comfort  of  his  successor.  The  next  class  of  settlers  differ  from  the 
former  in  having  considerably  less  dependence  on  the  killing  of  game,  in  remaining  in 
the  midst  of  a  growing  population,  and  in  devoting  themselves  more  to  agriculture.  A 
man  of  this  class  proceeds  on  a  small  capital ;  he  either  enlarges  the  clearings  begun  in 
the  woods  by  his  backwoodsmen  [sic]  predecessor,  or  establishes  himself  on  a  new 

site .  He  does  not  clear  away  the  forest  by  dint  of  labour,  but  girdles  the  trees. 

By  the  second  summer  after  this  operation  is  performed,  the  foliage  is  completely  de¬ 
stroyed,  and  his  crops  are  not  injured  by  the  shade.  He  plants  an  orchard,  which  thrives 

and  bears  abundantly  under  every  sort  of  neglect .  This  second  rate  class  of 

farmers  are  to  be  seen  in  the  markets  of  towns,  retailing  vegetables,  fruits,  poultry,  and 

dairy  produce . The  settler  of  the  grade  under  consideration,  is  only  able  to  bring 

a  small  portion  of  his  land  into  cultivation,  his  success,  therefore,  does  not  so  much 
depend  on  the  quantity  of  produce  which  he  raises,  as  on  the  gradual  increase  in  the 
value  of  his  property.  When  the  neighbourhood  becomes  more  populous,  he  in  general 
has  it  in  his  power  to  sell  his  property  at  a  high  price,  and  to  remove  to  a  new  settlement, 
where  he  can  purchase  a  more  extensive  tract  of  land,  or  commence  farming  on  a  larger 
scale  than  formerly.  The  next  occupier  is  a  capitalist,  who  immediately  builds  a  larger 
barn  than  the  former,  and  then  a  brick  or  a  frame  house.  He  either  pulls  down  the 
dwelling  of  his  predecessor,  or  converts  it  into  a  stable.  He  erects  better  fences,  and 
enlarges  the  quantity  of  cultivated  land ;  sows  down  pasture  fields,  introduces  an  im¬ 
proved  stock  of  horses,  cattle,  sheep,  and  these  probably  of  the  Merino  breed.  He  fattens 
cattle  for  the  market,  and  perhaps  erects  a  flour-mill,  or  a  saw-mill,  or  a  distillery. 
Farmers  of  this  description  are  frequently  partners  in  the  banks;  members  of  the 
State  assembly,  or  of  Congress,  or  Justices  of  the  Peace.” 

It  is  Flint’s  “  second-rate  class  of  farmers  ”  which  we  have  chiefly  in  mind 
in  the  following  description  of  farming  operations. 

LIVESTOCK  AND  ITS  MANAGEMENT. 

Every  settler  had  a  few  cattle,  enough  to  furnish  milk  and  butter  for  his 
family  and  a  yoke  or  two  of  steers  for  the  farm  work.  These  with  a  few  sheep 


12  In  Thwaites,  Early  Western  Travels,  IX,  232-235 ;  cf.  Ogg,  Fordham’s  Personal  Nar¬ 
rative,  125;  Fearon,  Sketches  of  America,  224;  Flower,  English  Settlement,  67-72. 


PIONEER  FARMING  IN  THE  WEST 


167 


of  mongrel  breeds,  a  large  herd  of  wild  swine,  and  fowls,  geese,  and  ducks 
constituted  his  livestock.  The  methods  of  raising  and  caring  for  all  kinds  of 
farm  animals  seem  at  this  date  inexcusably  neglectful,  but  considering  the 
scarcity  of  labor  and  capital  and  the  limited  marketing  opportunities,  they  were 
probably  at  that  time  sound  farm  management.  Unsheltered  the  year  round, 
the  cattle  and  swine  ran  at  large  in  the  woods,  each  owner  recognizing  his 
animals  by  their  ear-marks.  Winter  fodder  was  scarce.  But  little  hay  was 
cut  either  of  the  natural  or  imported  grasses.  Careful  farmers  had  bundles  of 
the  dried  blades  of  Indian  corn  and  pumpkins  which  they  fed  in  the  winter, 
but  in  many  cases  the  animals  had  to  shift  for  themselves  summer  and  winter. 
All  calves  were  preserved  without  regard  to  quality.  Cows  returned  to  their 
calves  mornings  and  evenings  when  they  were  partly  milked,  and  the  calves 
had  the  remainder  of  the  milk.  Under  such  conditions  the  deterioration  of 
the  stock  was  inevitable.  Even  westerners  admitted  that  their  neat  cattle  were 
usually  inferior  in  size  to  those  of  the  older  States  and  that  cows  did  not 
produce  the  same  amount  of  milk  nor  of  as  rich  a  quality.13  When  slaughtered 
they  would  weigh  from  700  to  900  pounds  and  those  which  at  4  or  5  years 
old  would  weigh  1,000  pounds  were  accounted  exceptional.14 

F.  A.  Michaux  15  wrote  from  Kentucky  in  1802: 

“Of  all  domestic  animals,  hogs  are  the  most  numerous;  they  are  kept  by  all  the 
inhabitants,  several  of  them  feed  a  hundred  and  fifty  or  two  hundred.  These  animals 
never  leave  the  woods,  where  they  always  find  a  sufficiency  of  food,  especially  in  autumn 
and  winter.  They  grow  extremely  wild,  and  generally  go  in  herds.  Whenever  they  are 
surprised,  or  attacked  by  a  dog  or  any  other  animal,  they  either  make  their  escape,  or 
flock  together  in  the  form  of  a  circle  to  defend  themselves.  They  are  of  a  bulky  shape, 
middling  size  and  straight  eared.  Every  inhabitant  recognizes  those  that  belong  to  him 
by  the  particular  manner  in  which  their  ears  are  cut.  They  -stray  sometimes  in  the 
forests,  and  do  not  make  their  appearance  again  for  several  months ;  they  accustom 
them,  notwithstanding,  to  return  every  now  and  then  to  the  plantation,  by  throwing  them 
Indian  corn  once  or  twice  a  week.” 

In  early  Illinois  it  was  not  uncommon  for  farmers  to  have  herds  of  from 
60  to  100  swine  running  in  the  woods.16  Such  herds,  however,  were  worth 
but  little  for  the  production  of  pork.  They  were  allowed  to  run  wild  until  2 
or  3  years  old  and  then  penned  up  for  a  few  weeks’  fattening  before  slaughter¬ 
ing.  In  some  cases  so  wild  were  the  animals  that  when  butchering  time  came 
they  were  hunted  in  the  forests  and  shot  with  the  rifle.17  Many  of  them  when 
mature  did  not  weigh  over  100  pounds.  A  good  average  would  probably 
have  been  175  to  200  pounds.  A  hog  of  200  pounds  was  considered  “a  fine 
chunk  of  a  fellow  ”  and  few  exceeded  that  weight.18  As  an  eastern  observer 
remarked :  “  It  is  true  Pork  in  this  country  costs  nothing  and  the  way  it  is 
raised  it  is  good  for  nothing.”  19  He  referred  to  the  western  hogs  as  “  the 
meanest  that  I  have  ever  seen.  When  I  first  came  here  I  tho’t  by  the  looks  of 


13  Peck,  New  Guide  for  Emigrants,  282. 

14  Woods,  Illinois  Country,  178,  181 ;  see  also  Flint  in  Thwaites,  Early  Western  Travels, 

IX,  163,  234,  310;  Duden’s  Report  in  Mo.  Hist.  Review,  XII  (1917-18),  p.  170; 
Flagg  in  Illinois  State  Hist.  Soc.  Transactions  (1910),  p.  158;  Conner,  Indiana 
Agriculture,  15;  Bradbury,  in  Thwaites  Early  Western  Travels,  V,  284. 

15  In  Thwaites,  Early  Western  Travels,  III,  246. 

16  Woods,  Illinois  Country  (1819),  p.  184. 

17  Beers,  Montgomery  County,  Ohio,  294. 

13  Woods,  Illinois  Country,  184;  Howell’s  Recollections,  64;  Smith,  Indiana,  I,  356. 

19  Flagg,  in  Illinois  State  Hist.  Soc.  Transactions  (1910),  p.  148. 


168 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


the  hogs  that  I  had  got  to  the  place  where  roasted  pigs  run  about  the  lots  for 
they  are  crumped  up  and  are  Brown  sandy  colour . 

CROPS  AND  TILLAGE. 

A  pioneer  family  required  to  begin  with  only  4  or  5  acres  of  cleared  land. 
Half  an  acre  was  usually  devoted  to  garden  vegetables,  another  half -acre  to 
wheat,  and  the  remainder  was  the  corn  patch.  Corn  was  usually  the  first  crop 
on  newly  cleared  land  in  the  New  West  and,  as  on  the  earlier  frontiers,  was 
the  chief  support  of  the  settlers.  Cornmeal  and  hominy  was  practically  the 
only  breadstuff  which  they  consumed,  although  wheat  was  often  raised  as  a 
cash  crop.  The  more  progressive  farmers  carefully  picked  off  the  tops  and 
blades  of  the  maize  from  the  stalks  in  the  field  and  preserved  them  for  winter 
fodder.  This  method  was  not  only  expensive  of  labor  but  caused  considerable 
loss  in  the  weight  of  the  ears.  A  new  method  introduced  into  Ohio  by  the 
emigrants  from  the  Potomac  Valley  in  Virginia  was  to  cut  and  stack  the  corn 
and  feed  it  to  the  stock  in  the  field.  In  localities  where  stock  were  fattened 
for  “  droving  ”  to  eastern  markets  the  unhusked  ears  were  fed  with  the  stalks.20 

Corn  was  planted  by  hand,  covered  with  the  hoe,  and  cultivated  with  the 
shovel  plough.  (See  fig.  59,  p.  303.)  The  description  given  by  Woods  21  in 
1819  shows  but  little,  if  any,  change  from  colonial  methods. 

“The  time  of  planting  is  from  April  to  the  middle  of  June;  the  middle  of  May  is 
considered  the  most  proper  season.  It  is  planted  in  rows,  of  about  four  feet  in  each 
direction;  and  after  it  is  up  they  plough  between  the  rows,  first  one  way,  and  in  a  week 
or  two  in  the  other  direction ;  a  third  ploughing  is  sometimes  given  to  it.  An  extremely 
light  plough,  drawn  by  one  horse,  is  used.  Between  the  corn  they  hoe  up  the  weeds  ieft 
near  the  corners  that  escape  the  plough ;  so  that  the  land  is  made  very  clean.  Generally 
two  or  three  plants  are  left  at  each  angle.  Pompions  are  often  planted  at  the  angles 
with  the  corn,  but  only  in  every  fifth  or  sixth  row,  and  at  some  distance  apart  in  the 
rows.  They  also  plant  a  small  kind  of  French-bean  with  part  of  their  corn,  the  stalks 
serving  instead  of  sticks  for  the  beans  to  run  on.” 

It  is  doubtful  whether  many  of  the  early  settlers  spent  much  time  hoeing 
their  corn.  Flagg  22  wrote  from  Edwardsville,  Illinois,  1818: 

“  The  method  of  Raising  Corn  here  is  to  plough  the  ground  once  then  furrow  it 
both  ways  and  plant  the  Corn  4  feet  each  way  and  plough  between  it  3  or  4  times  in  the 
Summer  but  never  hoe  it  at  all.” 

In  another  place  23  he  remarked : 

“  Corn  grows  from  10  to  15  feet  high  one  Ear  on  a  stalk.  The  ears  grow  very  high. 
I  have  seen  ears  so  high  that  I  could  not  hang  my  hat  upon  them  when  standing  upon 

the  ground .  After  Corn  is  planted  there  is  no  more  done  to  it  except  to  plow 

among  it  and  cut  up  the  Weeds.  They  hill  it  up  not  at  all.  2  men  plant  10  acres  a  day. 
Corn  is  always  sold  in  the  ear  in  th[i]s  state.” 

On  the  prairies,  after  the  sod  had  been  turned  and  while  the  tough  grasses 
were  decaying,  the  so-called  sod-corn  was  planted  in  the  furrows.  In  this 
way  a  small  crop  was  secured  with  no  expense  for  cultivation.24 


20  Howells,  Recollections,  148.  Diary  of  a  Naturalist,  in  American  Journal  of  Science, 

XXV  (1834),  p.235. 

21  Illinois  Country,  210. 

22  In  Illinois  State  Hist.  Soc.  Transactions  (1910),  p.  162. 

23  Flagg,  in  Illinois  State  Hist.  Soc.  Transactions  (1910),  p.  147. 

24  Birkbeck,  Letters  from  Illinois,  43;  Lippincott,  in  Journal  of  Political  Economy, 

XVIII,  276. 


PIONEER  FARMING  IN  THE  WEST 


169 


CORN  MARKETED  IN  THE  FORMS  OF  WHISKY  AND  PORK. 

Corn  in  its  original  state  was  not  marketable,  being  too  low  grade  a  commod¬ 
ity  to  stand  high  transportation  costs,  but  it  could  be  used  to  fatten  swine 
which  transported  themselves  to  market.  Another  indirect  way  of  marketing 
corn  and  rye  and  barley  as  well,  was  by  converting  it  into  whisky.  In  west¬ 
ern  Pennsylvania  the  marketing  of  grain  in  the  form  of  whisky  was  considered 
so  important  by  the  pioneer  farmers  that  when,  in  1794,  an  excise  tax  was 
imposed  on  distilled  liquors  they  arose  in  insurrection.25  In  1802  the  obnox- 
ious  taxes  were  repealed  and  thereafter  small  distilleries  could  be  found  scat- 
tered  throughout  the  western  country.  Not  all  the  product  was  sent  down  the 
Mississippi ;  a  great  quantity  was  consumed  by  the  pioneers  themselves. 

“No  difference  if  grain  was  scarce  or  dear,  or  times  hard,  or  the  people  poor,  they 
would  make  and  drink  whiskey.  And  the  number  of  little  distilleries  was  wonderfuf 
Within  two  miles  of  where  we  lived  there  were  three  of  them.  They  were  small 
concerns,  but  they  produced  enough.  They  were  commonly  fitted  up  with  a  twenty-five 
or  orty-gallon  still  and  half  a  dozen  tubs.  They  might,  perhaps,  have  produced  a 
barrel  a  day,  if  pushed  to  their  capacity.  The  distillers  would  exchange  a  gallon  of 
whiskey  for  a  bushel  of  corn  or  rye,  and  when  the  whiskey-jug  was  empty,  a  boy  would 
be  sent  on  a  bag  of  grain,  perched  on  an  old  horse,  to  the  still-house  to  makefile  ex¬ 
change  and  renew  the  supply.  People  were  not  particular  about  the  age  of  their  liquor 
and  it  was  often  drank  on  the  day  it  was  made.  The  custom  was  for  every  man  to 
iV  .  U I  occasions . that  offered;  and  the  women  would  take  it  sweetened  and 
reduced  to  toddy.  At  raisings,  huskings,  log-rollings,  and  all  manner  of  social  gather- 

t  wUV'’33  Td  as|anf’n"«Vator  and  a  si8n  of  hospitality;  and  the  manner  of  taking 
t  was  from  the  neck  of  the  jug,  each  man  swallowing  as  much  as  he  wanted.”  29 


WHEAT,  A  CASH  CROP.  • 

Wheat,  in  contrast  to  corn,  was  usually  raised  as  a  cash  crop  F  A  Mich- 
aux  27  wrote :  - 


Les  Americains  de  1’  mterieur  cultivent  le  bled,  plutot  par  speculation  pour  en  envoyer 
a  arme  dans  les  ports  de  mer,  que  pour  leur  consommation  particuliere :  car  les  neuf 
Qixiemes  d  entr  eux  ne  font  usuage  que  du  pain  de  mais ;  .  .  . 


In  some  parts  of  the  Allegheny  plateau,  as  for  example  in  the  Genesee 
country  wheat  and  other  small  grains  were  scratched  in  with  a  harrow  on 
newly-cleared  land,28  but  on  the  bottom  lands  of  Ohio  and  Kentucky  wheat 
was  not  sown  until  the  land  had  been  under  other  crops  for  a  year  or  two. 
A  common  practice  farther  west  was  to  sow  wheat  among  the  standing  corn  in 
September  and  cover  it  by  running  a  few  furrows  with  the  plough  between  the 
rows  of  corn.  The  dry  cornstalks  were  then  cut  down  in  the  spring  and  left 

on  the  ground.29  Better  wheat  crops  were  obtained  when  oats  intervened 
between  the  corn  and  wheat.30 


25  Pennsylvania  Archives,  2d  series,  IV  (1700-1706)  0.  6 

26  Howells,  Recollections,  125. 

27  V Travel^ III  ^  THiS  paSSage  is  *ncorrectly  translated  in  Thwaites,  Early  Western 

28  ^Nia*1*  the  Genesee  Tract>  in  Imlay,  Western  Territory,  4 77;  Maude,  Visit  to 


29  Peck,  New  Guide  for  Emigrants,  p.  275 ;  Flagg,  in  Illinois  State  Hist.  Soc.  Trans- 

actions  (1910),  p.  162. 

30  Faux,  in  Thwaites,  Early  Western  Travels,  XI,  187. 


170 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


CROP  YIELDS. 


Making  due  allowance  for  the  enthusiastic  exaggeration  typical  of  settlers 
in  a  new  community,  it  was  probably  true  that  they  secured  larger  crops  of 
corn  and  wheat  from  their  new  farms  than  they  could  have  raised  with  similar 
methods  on  land  east  of  the  mountains.  The  data  upon  which  the  earliest 
writers  based  their  estimates  must  have  been  fragmentary ;  nevertheless  they 
agree  fairly  well  with  those  of  the  next  generation.  Filson  (1788)  thought 
the  usual  crop  of  corn  in  Kentucky  “  on  the  higher  lands  ”  would  be  50  to  60 
bushels  to  the  acre  and  noted  exceptional  crops  of  100  bushels.  Wheat  “  upon 
a  moderate  computation  ”  produced  30  bushels.01  F.  A.  Michaux  stated 
in  1802  that  40  or  50  bushels  of  corn  would  be  considered  a  common  crop 
and  in  abundant  years  from  60  to  75  bushels  might  be  harvested.  The  usual 
crops  of  wheat  he  estimated  at  from  25  to  30  bushels.  In  western  New  York, 
near  Oneida  Lake,  according  to  Maude  33  (1800),  wheat  yielded  25  bushels  to 
the  acre  when  sown  on  partially  cleared  land  and  harrowed  in  without  plowing. 
On  land  free  from  stumps  and  unshaded,  30  or  35  bushels  might  be  expected. 
The  corn  crops  on  new  land  were  then  estimated  at  from  3°  to  45  bushels, 
with  exceptional  crops  running  as  high  as  60  bushels.  In  the  years  1815  to 
1840  we  have  a  number  of  estimates  covering  the  settlements  northwest  of 
the  Ohio  River.35  In  general  they  agree  that  50  bushels  of  corn  and  from  20 
to  25  bushels  of  wheat  were  regarded  as  good  average  crops.  These  figures 
should  not  of  course  be  interpreted  to  mean  that  in  any  year  the  crops  on  all 
farms  would  average  50  bushels  of  corn.  They  undoubtedly  would  have 
averaged  much  less  because  of  the  necessary  inclusion  of  many  defective  crops. 
They  indicate  merely  the  yields  which,  with  the  usual  cultivation  on  average 
soil,  a  settler  might  expect  to  receive. 


31  In  Imlay  Western  Territory,  318.  Practically  the  same  estimates  are  given  in  Ameri¬ 

can  Museum,  V  (1788),  p*  58,  and  by  Cutler,  in  Ohio  Arch,  and  Hist.  Soc.  Publica • 

tions,  III,  90. 

32  In  Thwaites,  Early  Western  Travels,  III,  238. 

33  Visit  to  Niagara,  32,  34, 40,  72.  _  . TT  ^  A>r  n  1  n 

34  J/cLfidevkcw'irp  Papers,  in  Buffalo  Hist.  Soc.  Publications,  II,  56  >  O  Callaghan,  Docu 

mentary  History  of  New  York,  II,  1148.  _  ,,  ,  „  . 

35  Evans,  in  Thwaites,  Early  Western  Travels,  VIII,  194  5  Ogg,  Fordhams  Personal 

Narrative,  118;  Hall,  Statistics  of  the  West,  128,  130;  Atwater,  Ohio,  91;  A.  Y. 
Farmer,  IX  (1836),  99;  Peck,  New  Guide  for  Emigrants,  19 7>  275- 


Chapter  XIII. — The  Development  of  Internal 
Trade  and  the  Beginnings  of  Commercial 
Agriculture  in  the  West. 

The  development  of  the  internal  trade  of  the  West  in  the  early  decades  of 
the  nineteenth  century  was  a  fact  of  great  significance  in  American  economic 
and  political  history.1  The  shipment  of  foodstuffs  from  the  settlements  in  the 
Ohio  Valley  to  the  sugar  and  cotton  plantations  of  the  South,  by  enabling  the 
latter  to  concentrate  their  attention  on  a  single  cash  crop,  favored  the  rapid 
extension  of  slavery  and  of  the  plantation  system  in  that  region.  The  western¬ 
ers,  on  the  other  hand,  with  the  proceeds  of  the  sales  of  pork,  flour,  whisky, 
and  tobacco  were  enabled  to  supply  themselves  with  manufactured  goods  of 
both  foreign  and  domestic  make  from  the  commercial  centers  east  of  the  Alle¬ 
ghenies.  The  rise  of  manufactures  in  the  East  was  in  its  turn  promoted  by 
the  growth  of  markets  in  the  South  and  in  the  West.  The  commerce  across 
the  mountains  consisted  at  first  almost  wholly  in  the  shipment  of  manufactured 
goods  from  east  to  west.  The  high  cost  of  overland  transportation  prohibited 
the  carriage  of  bulky  farm  products  for  long  distances.  The  westerners,  soon 
after  1800,  began  to  drive  cattle  and  swine  across  the  mountains.  After  the 
completion  of  the  Erie  Canal  had  lowered  transportation  rates,  western  grain 
and  provisions  entered  the  markets  of  the  Atlantic  seaboard,  competing  disas¬ 
trously  with  the  products  of  eastern  farms.  The  effects  of  western  competition 
on  eastern  agriculture  will  be  considered  in  a  later  chapter ;  for  the  present 
we  shall  keep  the  point  of  view  of  the  westerners,  outlining  the  development 
of  their  markets  and  considering  the  resulting  changes  in  western  farming. 

PRODUCTS  MARKETED  FROM  WESTERN  NEW  YORK. 

#  Even  in  the  earliest  settlements  markets  were  not  entirely  lacking.  The 
pioneers  of  western  New  York,  by  the  aid  of  considerable  land  transportation, 
were  able  to  utilize  the  water  routes  of  Lake  Ontario  to  carry  beef,  pork,  salt, 
flour,  potash,  and  whisky  to  Quebec.  They  shipped  wheat  and  flour  by  sleighs 
in  winter  to  Schenectady  for  later  reshipment  to  New  York  and  the  West 
Indies  via  the  Mohawk  and  Hudson  Rivers.  Grain,  whisky  and  lumber  were 
floated  down  the  Susquehanna  to  Baltimore.  Cattle  were  driven  to  Philadel¬ 
phia  and  Baltimore.2  In  Chautauqua  County  ashes  were  for  many  years  an 
important  article  of  trade  and  almost  the  only  article  which  readily  commanded 
cash. 

“  Many  a  settler  who  had  a  large  surplus  of  grain  which  he  was  unwilling  to  sell  at 
the  ruinously  low  prices  offered,  cut  and  burned  timber  for  the  ashes  from  which  to  get 


1  See  Callender,  Economic  History  of  United  States,  ch.  VII. 

2  Account  of  Genesee  Tract,  in  Imlay,  Western  Territory,  460;  Description  of  the  Genesee 

Country  in  O  Callaghan,  Documentary  History  of  New  York,  II,  1149,  1 1 61 ,  1162, 
1163,  Munro,  Genesee  Country,  Ibid.,  II,  1174?  1184;  Maude,  Visit  to  Niagara,  29,  57. 


172 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


money  to  pay  taxes  and  for  other  necessary  uses.  These  ashes,  and  those  from  burned 
log  heaps,  were  sometimes  drawn  several  miles  over  rough  roads,  and  exchanged  for 
goods,  or  at  a  reduced  price  for  cash,  if  cash  must  be  had.”  3 

THE  SOUTHERN  MARKET  FOR  WESTERN  FARM  PRODUCTS. 

A  natural  outlet  for  the  products  of  the  region  west  of  the  Alleghenies  was 
provided  by  the  Ohio  River,  and  its  tributaries,  and  the  Mississippi,  and  as 
early  as  1746  flour  and  other  commodities  had  been  sent  from  the  French  settle¬ 
ments  on  the  Wabash  and  Illinois  Rivers  to  New  Orleans.4  Exports  of  wheat 
from  western  Pennsylvania  via  the  Mississippi  to  New  Orleans  and  the  West 
Indies  had  begun  during  the  Revolution.  By  1800  Pittsburg  had  become  a 
center  of  a  thriving  trade,  exporting  corn,  flour,  and  salt  provisions  to  the 
south.  Kentucky  sent  flour  and  smoked  and  salt  pork  down  the  river,  but  at 
this  time  the  settlements  north  of  the  Ohio  contributed  very  little.5 


Table  24. — Cargoes  passing  the  falls  of  the  Ohio  at  Louisville,  18 10-18 11. 11 

[Source:  U.  S.  Bureau  of  Statistics  (Treasury  Dept.),  Report  on  Internal  Commerce  of  United 

States  (1887),  p.  187.] 


Articles. 

Quantity. 

Articles. 

Quantity. 

Flour  . 

206,855 

Butter  . 

41,151 

Bacon  . 

1,008,026 

Lard  . 

775,692 

Whisky  . 

15,797 

Onions  . 

364 

Cider  . 

4,193 

Potatoes  . 

3,019 

Pork  . . 

22,602 

Hemp  . 

1,050,492 

Apples  . 

4,200 

Dried  fruit  . 

442 

Oats  . 

6,700 

Yarn  and  cordage... 

189,020 

Corn  . 

79,795 

Fowls  . 

2  012,224 

Merchandise  . 

$592640 

Shoe  thread  . 

4,320 

Cheese  . 

8,569 

Country  linen . 

13,066 

Beans  . 

1,010 

Horses  . 

489 

Lumber  . 

....ft. 

2,325,210 

Beer  . 

459 

Live  hogs  . 

Cider,  royal  . 

L5I3 

2,250 

Tobacco  . 

3,891 

a  “  These  statistics,  which  were  taken  by  the  pilots  engaged  in  piloting  the  vessels  over  the  Oh10 
Falls,  for  three-fifths  of  the  vessels  passing  that  point  of  danger,  and  estimated  for  the  remainder, 
which  went  over  the  falls  during  extreme  high-water  without  a  pilot,  are  in  some  respects  more  com¬ 
plete  than  many  made  afterwards  when  statistics  of  the  river  trade  were  much  more  carefully  collected, 
for  the  later  figures  kept  no  record  of  the  number  of  fowls,  horses,  etc.,  sent  down  the  river. 

“  The  list  of  articles  now  sent  to  market  gives  some  idea  of  the  advance  and  development  that  has 
taken  place  on  the  lower  Mississippi  with  the  advent  of  American  rule.” 


Until  1803  New  Orleans  was  in  the  hands  of  foreign  nations,  first  the  Span¬ 
ish  and  then  the  French,  but  the  purchase  of  Louisiana  in  that  year,  by  trans¬ 
ferring  the  port  to  American  possession,  put  an  end  to  vexatious  commercial 
restrictions  and  encouraged  the  trade  of  the  upper  Mississippi  and  Ohio 
Valleys.  A  rather  careful  estimate  of  the  volume  and  character  of  the  export 
trade  of  the  Ohio  Valley  in  the  year  1810-1811  is  given  in  table  24. 

The  first  steamboat  appeared  on  the  Mississippi  in  1811  and  by  1820  steam 
navigation  had  achieved  great  results  in  reducing  the  time  of  the  voyage  up 
and  down  the  river.  But  steamboat  rates  were  high,  and  consequently  the 


3  Young,  Chautauqua  County,  New  York,  94. 

4  Benton,  in  J.  H.  U.  Studies  in  Hist,  and  Pol.  Science,  XXI,  Nos.  1-2,  p.  24. 

5  F.  A.  Michaux,  in  Thwaites,  Early  Western  Travels,  III,  145,  158,  191,  240,  245,  247; 

Harris,  Journal,  146. 


DEVELOPMENT  OF  INTERNAL  TRADE 


173 


flatboats,  barges,  keelboats, 
the  western  waters  and  to 
exported.6 


and  a  multitude  of  other  craft  continued  to  ply 
cariy  a  large  proportion  of  the  farm  products 


Aftcr  ic  is  there  was  a  noticeable  increase  in  the  demand  of  the  southern 
market  for  the  foodstuffs  of  the  upper  Mississippi  and  Ohio  Valleys  Up  to 
this  time  the  sugar  plantations  of  Louisiana  and  the  West  Indies  had  furnished 
the  only  outlet  for  western  products.  But  after  the  end  of  the  War  of  1812  a 

"nik  nnWH ' fr0n}  the  >C0tt0n  planters’  who>  abandoning  the  exhausted 
;  ,  5  f  1  ,e  ftantic  seaboard,  were  rapidly  opening  up  new  lands  with  slave 
labor  west  of  the  mountains.6 7 8 


F  ff,2  t,ll1'C€  nllll!on  dollars’  worth  of  goods  was  estimated  to  have  passed  the 
Falls  of  the  Ohio  on  the  way  to  market,  representing  much  of  the  surplus  of  the  Ohio 


Table  25  .—Receipts  of  produce  at  New  Orleans,  1822-1839  * 

[Source:  U.  S.  Bureau  of  Internal  Co™  «, 


Average 

1822-1824. 


Average 

1825-1829. 


Average 

1830-1834. 


Average 

183S-i839. 


Bacon  and  hams.. 
Pork  . 

Lard  . 

Beef,  dried  . 

Beef,  pickled  . 

Hides  . 

Butter  . 

Flour  . 

Corn  . 

Whisky  . 

Tobacco  . 

Potatoes  . 

Hay  . 

853  453 
3,062,000 
1,217,000 
2,580,000 
(12,900) 
495,467 
12,300 

308.900 

111.900 
94,638 
10,200 
24,700 

2,000 

400 


9,871,054 
7,828,000 
3,895  OOO 

7,763,914 
(42,700) 
1,026,420 
14  900 

428.400 

142,700 

168.400 
27,900 
26,200 

3,600 

650 


II,690,66l 

18,937,000 

10,085,000 

77,200 

1,541,480 

26,900 

416,900 

288,100 

403,300 

34,ioo 

29,000 

7,800 

1,000 


16,894,356 

3L732,ooo 

12,252,000 

73,400 

c  1,901,560 
21,200 
583,336 

355,7oo 

888,200 

43,ooo 

37.600 
16,900 

13.600 


rorTk,  ore LOCO  ftVh  fbM?Wtafon,Uno?k'nir  ’Si'1™  Yfd:  lbbd-  (caslT or  tierce)  of  bacon, 
Gutter  or  lard  =  s6  lbs.;  i  bbl  butter’ or  lard  —  1  bacon  —  50°  lbs.;  1  keg  or 

1  bbl  cornmeal  =  4  bus.  shelled  corn; T 5,1  cS?  on  ^  °r  lard=i.«o  lbs.; 

shelled  =  100  lbs.;  1  bushel  corn,  shelled  =  56  lbs  ear- 1.7  bus.  shelled  corn;  1  sack  corn, 

*  Years  beginning  September  1. 

reporfn/§wi“g  ^  that  a  mistake  was  made  in 

thesis  are  probably  nearer  the  true  quantities.  °  P0Unds-  The  figures  given  in  Pa™- 

beenTmadeP Squiva'lrat'toTbarref.  *°  ^  combines  barrels  and  In  this  average  the  tierce  has 


'alley.  Of  this,  pork  amounted  to  $1,000,000  in  value;  flour,  to  $900000-  tobacco  to 
$  >000>  and  whisky,  to  $500,000.  The  inventory  of  products  reveals  the  Mississippi 

agriculture.  ™St  “ SOciety>  producinS  th*  raw  materials  of  a  simple  and  primitive 


From  statistics  of  receipts  of  produce  at  New  Orleans,  table  25  has  been 
compiled,  showing  the  increase  in  the  shipments  of  the  more  important  western 


6  See  Gephart,  Transportation  in  the  Middle  West,  71,  96. 

See  Phillips,  American  Negro  Slavery,  ch.  X. 

8  Turner,  in  Am.  Hist.  Review,  XI  (1905-06),  324. 


174 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


products  down  the  river.  Although  these  figures  include  some  shipments  from 
the  lower  Mississippi  Valley,  all  the  tobacco  and  most  of  the  provisions  came 

through  the  Ohio. 


ORGANIZATION  OF  MARKETING. 

A  few  well-to-do  farmers  made  up  their  cargoes  and  sent  them  directly  to 
New  Orleans  on  their  own  responsibility,  but  most  of  the  business  was  in  the 
hands  of  the  merchants.  Fearon  wrote  (1817)  : 

“There  is  a  class  of  men  throughout  the  western  country  called  ‘  merchants/  who, 
in  the  summer  and  autumn  months,  collect  flour,  butter,  cheese,  pork,  beef,  whiskey, 
and  every  species  of  farming  produce,  which  they  send  in  flats  and  keel-boats  to  the 
New  Orleans  market.  The  demand  created  by  this  trade,  added  to  a  large  domestic 
consumption,  insures  the  most  remote  farmer  a  certain  market.  Some  of  these  specu¬ 
lators  have  made  large  fortunes.”  9 

Farmers  marketed  their  own  products,  according  to  Duden,10 

“  where  merchants  have  not  yet  established  themselves  and  are  limited,  almost  entirely 
to  shipments  of  grain  and  meats.  The  products  of  the  small  farms,  to  which  class 
most  of  the  farms  here  belong,  hardly  ever  is  so  great  but  what  the  planter  prefers  to 

dispose  of  his  produce  in  his  own  community .  In  the  central  as  well  as  in  the 

northern  states,  where  cereals  constitute  the  basis  of  agriculture,  most  of  the  farmers 
dispose  of  their  tobacco  and  cotton  in  their  own  neighborhood,  even  tho  they  ship  their 
grain  to  foreign  markets.  The  trade  in  wax,  tallow,  hides,  furs,  and  minerals  is  always 
in  the  hands  of  merchants.  The  same  is  true  of  brandies,  flour  and  many  other  things. 
The  American  does  not  sell  directly  to  the  consumer,  unless  he  happens  to  have  a  store 
himself,  the  ordinary  means  of  life,  which  are  taken  to  the  weekly  market,  excepted.  If 
a  person  has  something  to  sell  he  usually  takes  it  to  the  storekeeper,  who  disposes  of 
it  for  a  commission,  or  buys  it  outright.  Some  farmers,  for  instance,  make  use  of  the 
bad  weather,  to  make  shoes,  barrels  or  other  things.  All  these  things  they  take  to  the 
merchant  to  sell.  This  seems  to  be  the  most  advantageous  as  also  the  most  respectable 
way.  It  is  but  natural  that  such  a  method  should  lead  to  barter,  with  which  the  merchant 
usually  makes  a  double  profit.” 

The  business  of  the  merchant  comprehended  a  great  variety  of  services 
which  have  now  become  specialized  occupations.  As  storekeeper  he  sold 
drygoods  and  supplies  to  the  farmer  whom  he  financed,  also,  by  long  credits. 
He  packed  the  farmer’s  pork  and  ground  his  flour,  and  packed  it  in  barrels. 
He  was  also  engaged  in  transportation,  owning  and  operating  flat-bottom  and 
keel  boats  on  the  river.* 11 

An  attempt  to  promote  river  trade  by  the  association  of  farmers  with  mer¬ 
chants  was  made  in  1803  by  the  organization  of  the  Miami  Expoiting  Com¬ 
pany.  This  was  also  a  banking  institution  with  the  privilege  of  issuing  notes. 
The  company  did  a  prosperous  business  for  a  few  years,  but  discontinued 
exporting  in  1807,  because  of  disagreement  between  the  farmers  and  the  mer¬ 
chants  regarding  the  division  of  profits.  Other  companies  were  organized  with 
similar  purposes,  but  none  existed  long  enough  to  appreciably  influence  mar¬ 
keting  conditions.12 


9  Sketches  of  America,  201. 

10  Report  (1824-27),  in  Mo.  Hist.  Review,  XIII  (1918),  p.  273. 

11  Goodwin,  in  Ohio  Arch,  and  Hist.  Quarterly,  XVI  (1907),  p.  333. 

12  Gephart,  Transportation  in  the  Middle  West,  99. 


DEVELOPMENT  OF  INTERNAL  TRADE  175 

DEFECTS  OF  THE  NEW  ORLEANS  MARKET. 

The  New  Orleans  market  was  in  many  respects  unsatisfactory. 

“  Produce  would  be  brought  into  the  local  shipping  points  along  the  Ohio  River  and 
a  wait  of  weeks  was  often  necessary  before  the  river  would  rise.  The  rise  of  the  river 
frequently  meant  the  saving  of  a  year’s  labor,  and  when  the  flood  stage  came  joy 
was  unbounded.  4  The  Ohio  River  had  risen  twenty  feet  ’  writes  an  editor  4  and  once 
more  our  boats  are  released.’  These  were  flat-boats,  keel-boats  and  other  crafts  which 
had  been  loaded  with  flour,  pork,  lard,  whiskey  and  other  Ohio  products.  New  Orleans 
was  for  fifteen  years  after  the  settlement  of  the  state  in  the  possession  of  a  foreign 
nation,  which  was  almost  continually  hostile  to  the  commercial  interests  of  the  Ohio 
Valley  ;  and  even  after  this  obstacle  to  trade  was  removed  in  1803,  a  quarter  of  a  century 
elapsed  before  a  canal  was  constructed  around  the  falls  at  Louisville.  Even  when  New 
Orleans  was  reached,  it  was  often  found  to  be  an  unsatisfactory  market,  for  the  hot  and 
humid  climate  of  the  lower  Mississippi  caused  much  of  the  flour,  wheat,  corn,  pork  and 
other  perishable  products  to  spoil  in  transit.  Many  of  these  products  were  improperly 
prepared  for  carriage  through  a  warm  area  to  a  distant  market,  since  they  had  to  be 
shipped  when  boats  could  be  obtained  and  when  the  river  permitted.  There  was  a  lack 
of  capital  at  New  Orleans  and  consequently  a  dearth  of  elevators,  storage  rooms,  com- 
meraal  houses,  and  other  machinery  for  handling  a  large  trade  in  domestic  and  foreign 
goods.  Shipping  facilities  were  also  wanting,  for  steamers  sailed  irregularly.  In  con¬ 
sequence  of  these  drawbacks  the  New  Orleans  market  was  alternately  glutted  and 
emptied,  and  prices  fluctuated  violently.” 


PRICES  OF  FARM  PRODUCTS  IN  THE  WEST. 

The  following  data  from  the  diary  of  a  western  traveler  14  indicate  the 
general  level  of  the  price  of  farm  products  in  Pittsburg,  1807.  He  wrote : 

There  are  two  market  days  weekly,  and  the  common  prices  of  necessaries  are  — 
good  beef,  from  2^  to  4  cents  per  lb ;  pork  3*,  mutton  4,  veal  3,  venison  3  to  4,  bacon 
6  to  10,  butter  10  to  18,  cheese  8  to  12,  hogs  lard  8,  fowls  each  10  to  12,  ducks  25,  geese 
33  to  37,  turkies  40  to  75,  flour  $1  75  to  2  50  per  cwt.  or  from  3  50  to  4  50  per  barrel 
corn  33,  potatoes  40,  turnips  18,  Indian  meal  40  cents  per  bushel,  onions  a  dollar,  white 
eans  a  dollar,  dried  apples  and  peaches  a  dollar,  and  green  40  cents  per  bushel  eggs  10 
to  18  cents  per  dozen,  fresh  fish  3  to  6  cents  per  lb.,  maple  sugar,  very  good,  made  in  the 
country,  10  to  12  cents  a  pound,  whiskey  30  to  40  cents  per  gallon,  peach  brandy  75  to  80, 
eer  5  to  7  dollars  a  barrel,  and  cider  3  to  4,  700  country  linen  40  cents,  and  tow  cloth 
33  cents  per  yard ;  but  salt  comes  high,  being  generally  2 \  dollars  per  bushel . ” 


From  other  similar  accounts  15  we  may  conclude  that  the  prices  of  the  chief 
farm  products  in  western  cities  about  the  years  1815  to  1820  were  roughly  as 
follows :  Wheat  50  to  75  cents  a  bushel,  occasionally  as  high  as  $1 ;  corn  33 
to  50  cents,  occasionally  as  low  as  25 ;  pork,  $2.50  to  $4  per  cwt.,  occasionally 
$5;  beef,  $3.50  to  $5  per  cwt.;  bacon,  8  to  10  cents  per  pound;  butter  and 
cheese,  124  to  20  cents;  potatoes,  25  to  50  cents  a  bushel.  A  list  of  prices, 


Transportation  in  the  Middle  West,  95;  see  also  Esarey,  Indiana  306'  Faux 
in  Thwaites,  Early  Western  Travels,  XI,  179;  XII,  18. 

14  Cuming  in  Thwaites,  Early  Western  Travels,  IV,  247. 

™  Niles’  Register,  IX  (1815-16),  p.  420;  X  (1816),  p.  269;  XI  (1817),  p.  410;  Flagg, 
in  Illinois  State  Hist.  Soc.  Transactions  (1910),  pp.  142,  153,  162,  166,  167;  Ogg, 
hordhams  Personal  Narrative,  118;  Palmer,  Travels,  83. 


176 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


more  carefully  compiled  than  many,  is  given  by  Hulme  16  for  Zanesville,  Ohio, 
1818: 

Table  26. — Prices  at  Zanesville ,  Ohio,  July,  1818. 

[Source:  Hulme,  in  Thwaites,  Early  Western  Travels,  x,  7 4-] 

Dls.  Cts.  Dls.  Cts. 


Flour  (superfine)  per  barrel  of  196  lb.  from 

Beef,  per  100  lb . 

Pork  (prime),  per  100  lb . 

Salt,  per  bushel  of  5°  lb . 

Potatoes,  per  bushel . 

Turnips,  ditto  . 

Wheat,  ditto  of  60  lb.  to  66  lb . 

Indian  corn,  ditto  shelled . 

Oats,  ditto  . 

Rye,  ditto  . 

Barley,  ditto  . . 

Turkeys,  of  from  12  lb.  to  20  lb.  each . 

Fowls  . . . 

Live  Hogs,  per  100  lbs.  live  weight . 

Cows,  (the  best)  . . . 

Yoke  of  Oxen,  ditto . 

Sheep  . . . 

Hay,  per  ton,  delivered. . 

Straw,  fetch  it  and  have  it. 

Manure,  ditto,  ditto. 

Coals,  per  bushel,  delivered . 

Butter,  per  lb.  avoirdupois . 

Cheese,  ditto,  ditto . 

Loaf  Sugar  . 

Raw  ditto  . _ . 

Domestic  Raw  ditto . 

Merino  Wool,  per  lb.  avoirdupois,  washed. 

Three-quarter  Merino  ditto . 

Common  Wool  . 


5  o  to  5  75 

4  0  —  4  25 

4  50  —  5  0 

2  25 

o  25  —  0  31^ 

0  20 

0  75 

0  33i—  o  50 

0  25  —  0  33$ 

o  50 

0  75 

0  37s—  0  50 

o  123 —  o  18I 

3  0  —  5  0 

18  o  — 25  0 

50  0—75  0 

2  50 

9  0  — 10  0 


0  8 

O  12^ —  O  l8 
0  I2i —  0  25 

o  50 

o  31I 

0  1 81 

I  0 

O  75 

0  50 


After  1820  prices  tended  to  be  lower.  Wheat  in  Ohio  about  1825  was  con¬ 
sidered  high  at  50  cents  a  bushel  and  30  cents  was  the  usual  price  secured  by 
farmers  in  trade  at  country  stores.17  Table  2 6a,  based  on  data  presented  in  a 
congressional  debate,  presents  the  trend  of  wheat  prices  in  the  years  1820  to 
1840.  ; 


Table  26a. — Wheat  prices,  eastern  Ohio,  1820  to  1840. 

[Source:  Speech  of  Congressman  Weller,  of  Ohio,  August  4,  1841,  in  Congressional  Globe  and 

Appendix  X  (1841),  p.  501.] 


Year. 

Price 

per  bushel. 

Year. 

Price 

per  bushel. 

y 

1820  . 

$0.20 

o.si 

1827  . 

$0.50 

1834 

1821 

1828  . 

0.50 

1835 

1822 

0.383 

0.385 

0.423 

0.383 

0.38 

1829  . 

O.78 

1836 

1830  . 

0.50 

1837 

. 

I  8  OA 

1831  . 

0.50 

1838 

182^ 

1832  . 

0.653 

1839 

1826  . 

1833  . 

0.593 

1840 

Year. 


Price 

per  bushel. 


16  In  Thwaites,  Early  Western  Travels,  X,  74. 

17  Howells,  Recollections,  138. 


DEVELOPMENT  OF  INTERNAL  TRADE 


177 


In  1828  Flint 18  stated  that  a  fair  average  price  for  corn  in  quantities  in  the 
Cincinnati  market  had  not  exceeded,  in  the  past  three  years,  12^  cents  a 
bushel.  Pork  in  quantities  brought  only  1 J  cents  a  pound.  In  Indiana,  wheat 
sold  in  the  \eais  1830  to  1840  for  from  30  to  50  cents  a  bushel  and  corn  at 
from  10  to  12  cents.19  Peck  gives  the  following  prices  for  Illinois,  1836: 

Wheat,  $1.00  bush.;  Oats,  25c.  bush.;  Horses,  for  farm  work,  $50;  Cows  (in  spring), 
$7-15;  Butter  (summer),  10c.  lb.;  Cheese,  8  to  10c.;  Pork:  Bacon^7~8c.;  Hams,  8-ioc.; 
Stock  hogs,  60-100  lbs.  alive,  $i-$2  per  head/’  20 

EASTERN  MARKETS  FOR  LIVESTOCK. 

In  the  States  of  the  Atlantic  seaboard  there  was  rapidly  developing  an 
industrial  population  in  the  years  1810-1840,  and  with  it  was  created  a  home 
market  for  farm  products.  The  access  to  this  market  was  difficult,  however, 
for  land  carriage  for  most  farm  products  was  prohibitorily  expensive.  The 
farmer  had  one  commodity,  however,  which  could  be  made  to  transport 
itself  to  market,  viz.,  livestock,  cattle  and  swine.  A  beginning  in  eastward 
droving  was  remarked  in  1802,  by  Michaux,21  who  wrote: 

“The  number  of  horned  cattle  is  very  considerable  in  Kentucky;  those  who  deal  in 
them  purchase  them  lean,  and  drive  them  in  droves  of  from  two  to  three  hundred  to 
Virginia,  along  the  river  Potomack,  where  they  sell  them  to  graziers,  who  fatten  them 
in  order  to  supply  the  markets  of  Baltimore  and  Philadelphia.” 

A  few  years  later,  in  1804  or  1805,  the  first  herd  of  cattle  from  the  Scioto 
Valley,  Ohio,  was  successfully  driven  across  the  mountains  to  Baltimore.22 
From  that  time  until  about  1850  cattle-droving  eastward  was  a  well-recognized 
feature  of  Ohio  Valley  farming.  Travelers  crossing  the  mountains  to  the 
west  regularly  commented  on  the  droves  of  cattle  and  hogs,  and  occasionally 
even  horses  and  sheep,  which  they  met  on  the  way.23  In  1810  it  was  estimated 
that  40,000  head  of  hogs  were  annually  driven  from  Ohio  to  the  Philadelphia, 
Baltimore,  and  other  eastern  markets.24  The  first  herd  of  Western  cattle 
ever  brought  to  New  York  arrived  in  that  city  in  June  1817,  “as  fresh,” 
according  to  a  newspaper  report,  “  as  if  just  taken  off  one  of  our  Long  Island 
farms.  When  it  is  recollected  that  they  have  been  driven  nearly  1,000  miles, 
this  fact  will  be  considered  a  very  remarkable  one.”  25 

Two  grades  of  cattle  were  driven  eastward:  (1)  stock  or  store  cattle,  and 
(2)  cattle  that  had  been  fattened  on  corn.  The  former,  3-year  old  steers, 
grass  fattened,  were  taken  in  the  fall  to  eastern  Pennsylvania  and  also  to  the 
Potomac  Valley  and  sold  to  farmers  to  be  fattened  there  for  eastern  markets. 
The  corn-fed  animals,  partly  raised  in  Ohio  and  partly  in  Indiana  and  Illinois 


18  Mississippi  Valley,  I  (1828  ed.),  p.  227. 

19  Conner,  Indiana  Agriculture,  5. 

20  New  Guide  for  Emigrants,  275,  276,  281,  283,  284,  285. 

21  F.  A.  Michaux,  in  Thwaites,  Early  Western  Travels,  III,  245. 

22  U  S.  Census  of  i860,  Agriculture,  p.  cxxx;  Ohio  State  Board  of  Agriculture,  id 

Annual  Report  (1848),  p.  162. 

23  Cuming,  in  Thwaites,  Early  Western  Travels,  IV,  136,  228;  Melish,  Travels,  II,  51; 

Flint,  T.  imothy,  Recollections,  9J  flint,  James,  in  "Ihwaites,  Early  Western  Travels 
IX,  80;  Welby,  ibid.,  XII,  293. 

24  Kilbourn,  Ohio  Gazetteer  (7th  ed.,  1821),  p.  16. 

2*New  York  Press,  quoted  in  De  Voe,  Market  Book,  411.  See  also  Niles  Register,  XII 
(1817),  p.  287. 

13 


178 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


but  fattened  in  Ohio,  were  driven  more  slowly  across  the  mountains,  arriving 
at  eastern  stockyards  between  April  15  and  August  1. 

There  were  three  main  droving  routes :  ( 1 )  the  northern  by  way  of  Dun¬ 
kirk,  New  York;  (2)  the  middle  by  way  of  Pittsburg  to  Philadelphia;  and 
(3)  the  southern,  passing  through  Bedford,  Pennsylvania,  and  ending  in 
either  Philadelphia  or  Baltimore. 

“  During  the  summer  and  autumn,  along  these  lines  of  travel,  so  many  drovers  passed 
that  an  observer,  a  mile  or  more  away,  could  know  of  the  passing  of  stock,  for  far  up 
in  the  air  he  could  see  long  moving  lines  of  rising  dust.  In  the  winter  and  early  spring 
the  clay  pikes  became  almost  impassable  because  of  the  depth  of  the  mud.  And  worse 
than  that,  cattle  naturally  walk  abreast  of  each  other,  and  soldier-like  they  put  their 
feet  in  the  tracks  of  the  one  in  front,  and  in  this  way  great  trenches  were  made  across 
the  highway,  which  when  the  clay  dried  became  almost  impassable  for  carriages  and 

other  vehicles .  Seldom  were  there  less  than  one  hundred  cattle  in  a  drove,  and 

not  often  much  over  two  hundred  in  the  largest  droves.  When  fat  cattle  were  driven,  it 
was  not  unusual  to  have  the  drove  accompanied  with  as  many  or  even  more  stock  hogs. 
In  such  cases  the  hogs  cost  little  in  the  way  of  grain,  for  they  consumed  the  corn  that  the 
cattle  wasted.  When  hogs  were  taken  with  cattle  the  journey  took  about  a  week  longer. 
Droves  of  horses  would  average  twenty-two  miles  per  day,  stock  cattle  nine  miles,  fat 
cattle  seven,  and  cattle  with  hogs,  not  quite  so  many  miles  per  day . ”  2(5 

Marketing  conditions  were  bad.  It  required  40  or  50  days  to  reach  the  mar¬ 
ket,  and  within  that  time  prices  fluctuated  widely. 

“  It  was  not  uncommon  for  the  drover  to  be  met  by  speculators  some  three  or  four 
days’  journey  from  the  market.  These  were  men  who  were  good  judges  of  stock  and 
they  knew  well  how  the  market  was  supplied  and  how  prices  ruled.  To  a  great  extent 
they  had  the  advantage  of  the  drover,  who  did  not  have  access  to  a  daily  market  report, 
only  as  he  might  interview  returning  drovers.”  27 

With  the  development  of  Cincinnati  as  a  pork-packing  center  in  the  years 
1835-1840,  eastward  droving  of  hogs  declined.  Cattle  droving  came  to  an 
end  in  the  5o's  when  the  construction  of  trunk-line  railroads  deprived  Ohio 
of  the  advantage  of  nearness  to  the  eastern  markets. 

CATTLE  GRAZING  IN  EASTERN  OHIO. 

The  development  of  cattle  fattening  as  a  specialized  industry  in  Ohio  was 
a  natural  consequence  of  the  opening  of  the  eastern  market  for  western  live¬ 
stock.  Thousands  of  young  cattle  were  purchased  by  Ohio  graziers  at  the 
close  of  winter  from  the  farmers  of  Indiana  and  Illinois,  and  even  from 
Missouri,  to  be  fattened  for  eastern  droving.  The  rich  bottom  lands  of  the 
Scioto  and  other  tributaries  of  the  Ohio  yielded  better  crops  of  corn  than  of 
wheat  and  thousands  of  acres  of  the  former  grain  were  raised  for  cattle 
fodder.  The  method  of  feeding,  introduced  in  the  Scioto  valley  by  early 
settlers  from  the  South  Branch  of  the  Potomac  in  Virginia,  by  its  economy 
of  labor  was  to  a  large  extent  responsible  for  the  success  of  the  industry. 
Elsewhere  in  the  West,  corn-fodder  was  scantily  supplied  to  cattle,  consisting 
merely  of  tops  and  blades  laboriously  gathered  by  hand.  The  Scioto  farmers, 
however,  fed  the  unhusked  ears  with  the  fodder  from  stacks  in  the  field.  The 
cattle  were  fed  twice  a  day  in  open  lots  of  8  or  10  acres  each,  and  followed 


26  King  in  Ohio  Arch,  and  Hist.  Soc.  Quarterly,  XVII  (1908),  p.  249. 

27  Ibid.,  252. 


DEVELOPMENT  OF  INTERNAL  TRADE 


179 

by  hogs  to  clean  up  the  neglected  grain  and  ears.28  The  scale  on  which  the 
industry  was  conducted  is  indicated  by  the  size  of  the  herds  owned  by  individ¬ 
ual  farmers.  According  to  the  estimate  of  the  Ohio  Farmer 29  there  were  in 
Ohio,  about  the  year  1835,  58  graziers  whose  herds  in  the  aggregate  amounted 
to  11,802  head.  Herds  of  from  200  to  800  cattle  were  not  uncommon  and 
some  were  over  1,000. 

A  traveling  contributor  to  the  New  York  Farmer 30  wrote  the  following 
account  of  the  operations  of  a  farmer  in  the  neighborhood  of  Chillicothe. 

“  Mr.  G.  R.  purchased 

400  cattle,  principally  from  Missouri,  at  $10  each 
Labor  to  cultivate  150  acres  of  land,  1 
the  produce  of  which  was  fed  to  them./ . 


$4000  00 
300  00 


and  sold  them  at  his  door  seven  months'! 
after,  at  $15  00  each,  / 

leaving  him  a  net  profit  on  his  cattle  of 


$4300  00 
$6000  00 
$1700  00 


The  profit  on  the  store  cattle  and  swine,  fed  on  what  was  left  by  the  others,  he  con¬ 
siders  would  pay  all  trouble That  was  the  worst  year  he  ever  had,  but  mark  the  dif¬ 
ference  in  the  statement  that  follows.  The  same  gentleman  sold  this  spring,  480  cattle 
at  $30  each,  amounted  to  $14,40000,  from  which  deduct  expense  of  driving  to  market 
at  $7  each,.  $3,360  00  and  the  first  cost  $10  each,  $4,800,  leaves  him  $6,240  for  one  years 
produce  raised  on  his  farm,  whence  he  has  profit  on  his  store  cattle  and  hogs,  enough  to 
pay  all  expenses.  Now  you  may,  perhaps,  enquire  what  land  is  worth  here?  I  answer, 
a  good  farm,  with  stonehouse  and  other  improvements,  in  the  vicinity  of  Chillicothe, 
sold  for  $10  per  acre,  and  good  land,  without  buildings,  sells  from  $1  to  $5.” 


Specialization  in  the  fattening  of  swine  on  corn  lands  had  begun  by  1835 
in  the  upper  Wabash  Valley.  Stock  purchased  from  the  raisers  were  turned 
into  a  field  of  ungathered  corn  in  the  middle  of  September  and  into  another  as 
soon  as  that  was  eaten  oft  clean,  until  at  the  end  of  three  months  they  were 
considered  ready  for  the  southern  markets.  Some  farmers  fattened  as  many 
as  1,000  swine  in  a  year.31 


IMPORTATION  OF  IMPROVED  ENGLISH  CATTLE. 


The  improvement  of  the  breed  of  Ohio  cattle  by  the  importation  of  English 
stock  had  received  considerable  attention  before  1840.  The  first  English 
cattle  to  cross  the  mountains  were  those  taken  by  members  of  the  Patton  family 
from  Virginia  to  Kentucky  about  the  year  1795-  A  few  years  later  represen¬ 
tatives  of  this  stock  were  taken  into  Ohio,  where  they  soon  gained  a  wide 
reputation.  They  were  large  animals,  coarse  and  rough,  with  long,  widespread 
horns,  of  no  well-defined  breed  32  and  on  account  of  their  great  growth  were 
slow  in  coming  to  maturity.  By  crossing  these  animals,  and  later  importations 
of  the  same  type,  on  the  native  stock  a  considerable  improvement  was  effected. 


90  k'  i860  ^Agriculture,  p.  exxx ;  Peck,  New  Guide  for  Emigrants,  109,  283. 

■  Quoted  in.  The  Cultivator  III  (1836-37),  P-  32.  See  also  Diary  of  a  Naturalist 
,«tt  „jamin  Silliman)  in  American  Journal  of  Science,  XXV  (1834),  pp  23=3  237 

30  HI  (1830),  p.  273. 

31  Ellsworth,  V alley  of  the  Upper  Wabash,  39,  42. 

i  Ins  description  is  from  U.  S.  Census  of  i860,  Agriculture ,  p.  cxxxii,  and  Beatty, 
Essays  on  Practical  Agriculture ,  33.  Some  later  writers  hold  that  the  original 
importations  were  Shorthorns.  See  Plumb,  Types  and  Breeds  of  Farm  Animals,  183. 


180 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


In  1817  the  first  importations  of  pure-blood  English  stock,  began  to  arrive  in 
Kentucky,  and  among  them  came  the  first  of  the  famous  “  Shorthorns.” 33 

“The  short  horns  proved  a  valuable  acquisition  to  the  existing  stock  of  the  country 
though  the  quality  of  their  beef  was  perhaps  no  better  than  the  Patton  or  Miller  stock, 
nor  were  the  cows  better  milkers,  but  their  early  maturity,  and  aptitude  to  fatten  were 
qualities  peculiarly  desirable  at  the  time,  had  they  been  properly  appreciated  and  im¬ 
proved  upon  by  the  breeders  generally.”  34 

Although  the  new  breeds  were  known  in  Indiana  and  Ohio  as  well  as 
in!  Kentucky  there  was  little  general  interest  among  farmers  in  stock  improve¬ 
ment  by  importation.  English  cattle  were  regarded  as  too  “  fancy  ”  for  the 
average  farmer. 

The  organization  in  1834  of  the  Ohio  Company  for  Importing  English 
Cattle  marked  the  beginning  of  a  new  stage  in  the  betterment  of  western 
livestock.  Heretofore,  importations  had  been  sporadic,  depending  on  the 
whims  and  financial  means  of  individual  gentlemen  farmers.  The  new  com¬ 
pany,  with  a  capital  of  $9,200  subscribed  in  shares  of  $100  each,  sent  agents 
abroad  who  selected  and  brought  to  Ohio  19  head  of  thoroughbred  Shorthorn, 
or  Improved  Durham,  stock  from  the  herds  of  the  most  celebrated  breeders. 
The  cattle  were  kept  together  under  the  care  of  an  agent  and  their  number 
was  increased  by  later  importation  until  1836  when  they  were  sold  at  auction 
and  scattered  extensively  over  Ohio.  In  1837  another  large  importation  was 
made  and  sold  by  the  same  methods.  The  results  on  the  breed  of  Ohio  cattle 
were  unmistakable.35 

DIFFICULTIES  OF  OVERLAND  TRANSPORTATION. 

The  cheapening  of  transportation  costs  by  the  improvement  of  roads  and 
by  the  building  of  canals  was  responsible  for  the  beginning  of  a  new  era  in 
western  agriculture.  Rivers  were  the  natural  means  of  communication,  but 
roads  were  necessary  to  bring  products  of  inland  farms  to  the  waterside.  The 
first  roads  were  merely  trails,  passable  only  on  horseback.  A  considerable 
amount  of  money  was  invested  in  the  years  1800  to  1840  in  the  improvement 
of  these  trails  and  in  making  new  roads,  but  from  the  descriptions  of  the 
highways  thus  produced  we  must  conclude  that  they  afforded  little  encourage¬ 
ment  to  farmers.  The  so-called  roads  were  merely  narrow  avenues  through  the 
woods  from  which  the  trees  had  been  felled  and  rolled  away,  leaving  the 
brushwood  and  stumps  a  foot  or  a  foot  and  a  half  high.  They  retained  their 
natural  clay  foundation  without  artificial  surfacing  of  any  kind.  Little  atten¬ 
tion  was  paid  to  grade,  and  many  of  them  led  over  steep  hills.  A  trip  over 
such  thoroughfares  in  a  light  vehicle  was  no  small  adventure.  For  loaded 
wagons  during  the  greater  part  of  the  year  they  were  impassable,  and  even  at 
their  best  hauling  over  them  was  expensive.36 

33  American  Farmer,  II  (1820-21),  p.  313;  IV  (1822),  pp.  223,  280. 

34  U.  S.  Census  of  i860,  Agriculture,  p.  cxxxii. 

35  Ohio  State  Bd.  Agric.,  12th  Annual  Report  (1857),  p.  301 ;  Flint,  in  Maine  Bd.  Agric., 

igth  Annual  Report  (1874),  p.  140. 

36  The  construction  of  turnpikes  was  not  seriously  undertaken  until  after  1830,  and 

then  only  in  the  more  densely  settled  districts.  Descriptions  of  western  roads  about 
1820  are  given  by  Welby  in  Thwaites,  Early  Western  Travels,  XII,  241 ;  and  by 
Flint,  Ibid.,  IX,  253.  See  also  Welker,  in  Western  Reserve  Hist.  Soc.,  Tracts,  IV, 
No.  86,  p.  53;  Smith,  Indiana,  I,  344;  Gephart,  Transportation  in  the  Middle  West, 
51,  129-134,  141 ;  Kilbourn,  Ohio  Gazetteer  (nth  ed.,  1833),  p.  xxvi. 


DEVELOPMENT  OF  INTERNAL  TRADE 


181 


“  With  such  roads  it  was  exceedingly  difficult  to  market  grain  and  other  produce.  With 
ox-teams  it  required  three  days  to  go  twenty-five  miles  to  market  and  return.  Unless  the 
roads  were  unusually  good,  it  required  two  yoke  of  oxen  to  draw  what  would  now  be 
called  a  small  load.  Counting  time,  it  was  almost  worth  a  load  of  grain  to  market  it.”  37 

Faux  estimated  that  in  Indiana,  in  1818,  the  usual  price  for  land  carriage 
was  50  cents  for  100  pounds  for  every  20  miles,  sometimes  more,  but  never 
less.  Flower  39  wrote  that  land  carriage  to  the  Wabash  River,  a  distance 
of  9  miles,  cost  16  cents  per  100  pounds.  At  such  rates  corn  could  not  stand 
the  expense  of  moving  20  miles,  even  though  produced  at  no  cost,  and  wheat 
could  not  be  profitably  transported  by  land  more  than  50  or  75  miles. 

OPENING  OF  THE  ERIE  CANAL  CAUSES  WESTWARD  SHIFT  IN 

WHEAT  PRODUCTION. 

The  opening  of  the  Erie  Canal  in  1825  marked  the  beginning  of  a  new  era 
in  western  trade.  The  reduction  in  transportation  costs  thus  accomplished 
was  eventually  to  enable  the  farmers  of  the  Ohio  Valley  to  ship  great  quanti¬ 
ties  of  grain  and  provisions  to  eastern  markets.  It  did  not  immediately  turn 
the  current  of  western  farm  products  from  the  south  to  the  east,  for  until 
1850  the  trade  down  the  Mississippi  increased  more  rapidly  than  the  trade 
via  the  canal.  In  the  years  before  1840  its  influence  was  confined  chiefly  to  the 
wheat  farmers  of  western  New  York  and  of  the  lake  shore  of  northern  Ohio. 
In  western  New  York  wheat  became  the  chief  crop  and  the  Genesee  Country 
became  our  chief  wheat-growing  section. 

“  Previous  to  the  construction  of  the  canal  the  cost  of  transportation  from  Lake  Erie 

to  tide-water  was  such  as  nearly  to  prevent  all  movement  of  merchandise . The 

expense  of  transportation  from  Buffalo  to  New  York  was  stated  at  $100  per  ton,  and 
the  ordinary  length  of  passage  twenty  days ;  so  that,  upon  the  very  route  through  which 
the  heaviest  and  cheapest  products  of  the  West  are  now  sent  to  market,  the  cost  of 
transportation  equalled  nearly  three  times  the  market  value  of  wheat  in  New  York; 
six  times  the  value  of  corn ;  twelve  times  the  value  of  oats ;  and  far  exceeded  the  value 
of  most  kinds  of  cured  provisions.”  40. 

Under  the  stimulus  of  the  market,  farmers  in  Onondaga  County  made  no¬ 
table  progress  in  better  methods  of  wheat  cultivation. 

“  They  know,  better  than  they  did,  how  to  prepare  for  this  crop ;  which  is  done,  in 
many  instances,  by  less  expensive  modes  of  culture.  They  are  more  careful  than  they 
were  to  sow  clean  and  good  seed.  Instead  of  such  meslin  crops  of  chess,  cockle,  rye, 
smut  and  wheat,  all  intermixed,  as  grew  here  under  the  slovenly  husbandry  of  former 
years,  the  wheat-fields  of  this  county,  with  but  few  exceptions,  are  now  expected  to 
produce  crops  exhibiting  a  very  cleanly  and  neat  appearance.  The  smut  of  wheat  is 
almost  banished  from  the  county.”  41 

The  scale  of  farming  operations  in  this  region  also  showed  considerable 
enlargement,  crops  of  1,500  to  3,000  and  even  of  6,000  bushels  being  gathered 
by  some  farmers.42 

In  northern  Ohio  the  price  of  wheat  rose  rapidly  after  1825,  but  it  was  not 
until  the  completion  in  1832  of  canals  connecting  the  Great  Lakes  with  the  Ohio 

37  Adams,  in  Mich.  Pol.  Sci.  Assn.  Publications ,  III  (1899),  No.  7,  p.  16. 

38  In  Thwaites,  Early  Western  Travels,  XI,  291. 

39  Ibid.,  X,  142. 

40  Andrews,  Report  on  Colonial  and  Lake  Trade,  234. 

41  N.  Y.  Bd.  Agric.  Memoirs,  III  (1826),  p.  89. 

42  N.  Y.  Farmer,  VI  (1833),  p.  337. 


182 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


River  that  the  advantages  of  cheap  water  transportation  were  made  available 
to  farmers  in  the  interior.  As  early  as  1830,  200,000  bushels  of  Ohio  wheat 
were  milled  at  Rochester.  The  flour  was  considered  of  a  lower  quality  than 
that  of  western  New  York.  It  brought  a  lower  price  at  the  mills  and  was 
graded  lower  when  inspected  for  export.43  In  1835  Ohio  was  the  only  grain¬ 
exporting  territory  on  the  lakes.  In  that  year,  86,223  barrels  of  flour  and 
1,354,995  bushels  of  wheat,  all  Ohio  products,  passed  through  the  Erie  Canal. 
Before  1840  shipments  of  wheat  had  been  made  from  both  the  western  and 
eastern  shores  of  Lake  Michigan.44 

Table  27  45  showing  the  principal  articles  shipped  from  Buffalo  by  canal 
in  1835  and  in  1840  indicates  the  character  and  extent  of  the  eastward  ship- 


Table  27. — Articles  shipped  eastward  from  Buffalo  by  canal. 
[Source:  Andrews,  Report  on  Colonial  and  Lake  Trade,  85.] 


Articles. 

1835- 

1840. 

Flour  . barrels.. 

Wheat  . bushels.. 

Corn  . do - 

Provisions  . barrels.. 

Ashes  . do - 

Staves  . number.. 

Wool  . pounds.. 

86,233 

95,071 

14,579 

6,502 

4,419 

2565,272 

140,911 

1,030,632 

633,700 

881,192 

47,885 

25,070 

7,008 

22,410,660 

107,794 

3,422,687 

Butter 

Cheese  r . do .... 

:  Lard 

ments  of  western  produce.  It  does  not  include  the  entire  exports  of  Ohio  on 
the  lakes,  for  in  addition  to  the  canal  traffic  considerable  quantities  of  pork  and 
flour  were  shipped  to  Montreal  and  Quebec.40 

OTHER  COMMODITIES  PRODUCED  FOR  SALE— CHEESE, 

TOBACCO  AND  WOOL. 

The  shipments  of  cheese  shown  in  table  27  were  the  product  of  the  New 
England  settlers  on  the  Western  Reserve  in  northern  Ohio.  Very  soon  after 
settlements  had  been  made  in  this  region  cheese  was  sold  in  Pittsburg.  Some 
farmers  made  from  1  to  2  tons  in  a  season.47  About  1820,  Ohio  cheese  w*as 
first  shipped  down  the  river  to  southern  markets.48 

The  cultivation  of  yellow-leaf  tobacco  as  a  cash  crop  began  about  1825, 
in  the  hilly  region  of  Ohio  centering  around  Licking,  Fairfield,  Perry,  and 
Muskingum  counties. 

“  For  two  or  three  years  the  people  in  and  near  this  neighborhood  had  been  raising 
tobacco  of  a  particular  variety,  which  proved  a  profitable  business,  and  helped  materially 


43  N.  Y.  Farmer,  III  (1830),  p.  217;  IV  (1831),  pp.  109,  203. 

44  U.  S.  Census  of  i860,  Agriculture,  p.  cxlvi. 

45  From  Andrews,  Report  on  Colonial  and  Lake  Trade,  85.  It  will  be  noted  that  the 

figures  for  wheat  shipments  are  considerably  less  than  those  given  in  the  previous 
paragraph.  Andrews  admits  that  his  figures  are  not  entirely  accurate. 

46  Atwater,  Ohio,  310. 

47  Cuming,  in  Th waites,  Early  Western  Travels,  IV,  91  and  note. 

48  Burkett,  Agriculture  of  Ohio,  179. 


DEVELOPMENT  OF  INTERNAL  TRADE 


183 


to  supply  the  farmers  with  articles  they  needed,  and  to  pay  for  their  lands,  for  the  crop 
would  mostly  bring  cash.  The  kind  of  tobacco  raised  was  a  variety  that  had  been 
raised  in  Maryland,  and  was  known  as  light  or  yellow  tobacco.  It  differed  from  the 
Virginia  crop  in  being  a  lighter  and  finer  plant,  and  being  cured  by  the  heat  of  fire, 
instead  of  the  air  of  a  shed,  as  was  the  heavier  kind.  It  was  left  for  the  leaf  to  ripen  or 
turn  >ellow  upon  the  stalk,  when  it  was  gathered  and  dried  over  great  fires  in  a  close 
house,  so  constructed  as  to  confine  the  heat  around  the  leaves  until  they  were 
thoroughly  cured.”  49 

For  a  few  years  prices  were  high,  ranging  from  $6  to  $40  per  hundred¬ 
weight,  and  successful  raisers  cleared  large  profits.  A  tobacco  mania  prevailed  j 
tobacco  was  regarded  as  a  sure  road  to  wealth  and  other  crops  were  neglected. 
Such  quantities  of  Ohio  leaf  were  received  in  Baltimore  as  to  make  Maryland 
growers  apprehensive  of  the  new  western  competition.  Most  of  the  demand 
for  the  yellow  leaf  came  from  Europe,  where  it  was  consumed  chiefly  by 
the  more  wealthy  classes.  Their  demand  proved  inelastic,  and  within  a  few 
years  the  market  was  so  overstocked  that  prices  fell  to  between  $2  and  $3 
per  hundredweight,  resulting  in  temporary  reduction  of  the  crop  but  not  in  its 
complete  abandonment.50 

Commercial  wool-growing  had  made  but  little  progress  in  the  West  before 
1840.  Although  sheep  had  increased  rapidly,  they  were  still  largely  kept  for 
the  supply  of  domestic  textiles.  A  few  woolen  factories  had  been  established, 
notably  those  at  Steubenville,  Ohio,  creating  a  demand  for  fine  wool,  and  in 
response  to  this  demand  Merino  sheep  had  been  brought  from  the  East  to 
Ohio.51  A  few  flocks  of  Merinos  were  kept  in  Indiana  and  Illinois  before 
1820.'  Small  shipments  of  wool  eastward  across  the  Alleghenies  began  about 
1825.  From  Washington  County,  Pennsylvania,  out  of  a  total  clip  of  over 
400,000  pounds,  it  was  estimated  that  three-fourths  would  be  consumed  in 
household  manufactures,  and  of  the  remaining  100,000  pounds  two-thirds 
would  be  used  in  western  factories  and  one-third  sent  eastward.53  In  this 
county  wool  was  beginning  to  compete  with  wheat  as  a  cash  product  and  in 
western  New  York  the  substitution  of  sheep  for  cattle  was  being  discussed.54 

The  small,  proportions  which  the  shipments  of  western  wool  had  attained 
before  1840  is  indicated  by  the  statistics  of  the  clearances  at  Buffalo  over  the 
Erie  Canal,  which  carried  to  eastern  markets  almost  all  the  wool  produced 
in  the  Ohio  Valley.  In  the  years  i834~i840  these  shipments  were: 55 


1834 

1836 

1837 


lbs. 

186,000 
252  OOO 
39,ooo 


1838 

1839 

1840 


lbs. 

109,000 

131,000 

170,000 


49  Howells,  Recollections,  131. 

*»  American  Farmer,  VII  (1825),  pp.  348,  4H ;  VIII  (1826),  pp.  224,  336,  397;  American 
Journal  of  Science,  XXV  (1834),  p.  232;  Atwater,  Ohio,  88. 

Hves  Renter,  VI  (1813-14),  pp.  209,  210;  VII  (1814-15),  p.  350. 

“  qaux,.in  Thwaites,  Early  Western  Travels,  XI,  250;  Hall,  Statistics  of  the  West,  147. 
American  Farmer,  VII  (1825),  p.  138;  See  also  Ibid.,  X  (1828),  p.  286,  and  Hazard, 
Register  of  Pennsylvania,  I,  142. 

54  N.  Y.  Bd.  Agric.  Memoirs,  III  (1826),  p.  94,  95. 

55  From  Niles  Register,  LXIX  (1835-36),  p.  54. 


Chapter  XIV. — The  Organization  and  Education 

of  Farmers. 

THE  SPIRIT  OF  IMPROVEMENT. 

The  closing  decades  of  the  eighteenth  century  gave  indications  of  the  be¬ 
ginning  of  a  new  epoch  in  northern  agriculture.  We  have  already  noted  sig¬ 
nificant  improvements,  such  as  the  introduction  of  the  use  of  gypsum,  the 
rapid  increase  in  the  sowing  of  clover  and  other  grasses,  and  Jefferson’s 
experiments  with  an  improved  plough.  Although  none  of  these  changes  had 
immediately  a  widespread  influence  on  agricultural  production,  yet  taken 
together  with  the  organization  of  agricultural  societies  and  the  beginning  of 
American  agricultural  literature,  they  indicated  the  rise  of  a  new  and  enthusi¬ 
astic  interest  in  agricultural  improvement. 

The  origin  of  the  new  spirit  in  agriculture  seems  allied  to  the  revolutionary 
political  changes  which  were  taking  place  in  the  years  1775  to  I79°-  The  suc¬ 
cessful  attainment  of  American  independence  in  1783  and  the  establishment 
in  1789  of  a  new  national  government,  after  6  critical  years  of  anarchy  and 
economic  depression,  were  accomplishments  that  stirred  men’s  minds  with 
patriotic  pride.  They  were  proud  of  their  new  country  and  looked  about  for 
something  further  to  do  to  make  it  happy  and  prosperous.  Washington,  Jef¬ 
ferson,  and  many  others  were  familiar,  by  correspondence  or  by  personal 
observation,  with  the  revolutionary  changes  which  were  under  way  in  the 
agriculture  of  England.  Contrasting  European  progress  with  the  stagnant 
condition  of  agriculture  at  home,  they  thought  they  saw  a  great  opportunity 
for  constructive  service  before  them.  To  popularize  the  knowledge  of  the 
new  farming  in  America  seemed  an  eminently  worthy  task. 

THE  FIRST  AGRICULTURAL  SOCIETIES. 

The  agencies  selected  for  this  work  were  agricultural  societies,  in  imitation 
very  probably  of  those  recently  organized  in  England.  Beginning  with  the 
formation  in  1785  of  the  Philadelphia  Society  for  Promoting  Agriculture, 
societies  were  organized  before  1800  in  Charlestown,  South  Carolina,  Hallo- 
well,  Maine,  New  York  City,  Boston,  New  Haven,  and  in  Middlesex  County, 
Massachusetts.1  The  nature  of  these  societies,  their  purposes,  and  program 
are  revealed  in  their  articles  of  association.  They  were  not  intended  to  be 
clubs  of  practical  working  farmers  who  might  aid  each  other  by  the  exchange 
of  facts  and  ideas  from  experience,  but  rather  groups  of  men  of  all  profes¬ 
sions  who  were  to  receive,  adapt,  and  disseminate  the  knowledge  of  the  prog- 


1  A  society  “  mainly  for  improving  agriculture,”  but  embracing  other  industries  also  in 
its  interests,  had  beep  organized  in  New  York  as  early  as  1763,  but  I  have  found  no 
record  of  its  activities.  See  Furman,  Long  Island  Antiquities ,  91. 

184 


ORGANIZATION  AND  EDUCATION  OF  FARMERS  185 

ress  accomplished  in  other  countries.  So  the  preface  to  the  Laws  and  Regula¬ 
tions  of  the  Massachusetts  Society  for  Promoting  Agriculture  2  reads; 

One  great  object  of  this  Society  will  be,  to  obtain  and  publish  an  account  of  the 
improvements  of  other  countries,  and  to  procure  models  of  the  machines  in  which 
they  excel.  It  will  attend  to  whatever  relates  to  rural  affairs,  and  especially  to  promote 
an  increase  of  the  products  of  our  lands,  ....  To  encourage  the  utmost  attention  to 

th uSC  ?  .Cti ,the  Society  Wlll>  from  time  to  time,  offer  such  premiums  as  their  funds 
will  admit.  They  consider  agriculture  in  its  various  branches  and  connexions  as  highly 
interesting  to  all  mankind.  The  wealth  and  importance  of  the  community,  is  so  intimately 
connected  with,  and  dependent  on  the  extent  and  success  of  agriculture,  that  every  one 
w  10  is  desirous  of  advancing  the  happiness,  prosperity,  and  dignity  of  his  country,  its 

commerce,  and  convenient  subsistence  of  individuals,  will  lend  his  aid  to  this  most 
useful  institution. 

The  appeal  of  the  society  organized  in  Philadelphia  in  1785  is  equally 
broad.  Here  we  read  : 3 

“  ThV  Philadelphia  Society  for  Promoting  Agriculture,  was  formed  ....  by 
some  citizens,  only  a  few  of  whom  were  actually  engaged  in  husbandry,  but  who  were 
convinced  of  its  necessity;  and  of  the  assistance  which  such  an  association,  properly 

attended  to,  would  afford  to  the  interests  of  agriculture .  Many  citizens  have  a 

mistaken  idea,  that  their  not  being  agriculturists,  disqualifies  them  from  becoming 
useful  members  of.  our  Society .  The  interests  of  Commerce,  Arts,  and  Manu¬ 

facturers,  form,  with  Agriculture,  an  indissoluble  union ;  to  which  citizens  of  every 
class  and  calling,  have  it  amply  in  their  power  to  contribute.” 

CHARACTER  OF  THEIR  MEMBERSHIP. 

These  appeals  were  answered  in  the  spirit  in  which  they  were  issued.  An 
examination  of  the  early  membership  of  the  societies  shows  that  they  were 
composed  of  men  in  whose  lives  agriculture  was  only  one  of  many  interests, 
and  often  the  least  important  of  all.  There  were  in  the  Massachusetts  society 
men  of  legal  education,  who  had  become  prominent  in  political  life,  such  as 
Samuel  Adams,  James  Sullivan,  then  attorney-general  of  the  state  and  later 
governor,  General  Joseph  Lincoln,  then  collector  of  the  port  of  Boston,  Chris¬ 
topher  Gore,  John  Lowell,  and  Jonathan  Mason,  all  lawyers  and  active  in 
politics  and  government.  Besides  these  there  were  merchants,  such  as  Stephen 
Higginson,  Charles  Vaughan,  and  Azor  Orne.  We  find  also  representatives  of 
the  two  other  professions,  ministers  and  doctors,  who,  blessed  with  an  outlook 
on  the  affairs  of  the  community  beyond  their  immediate  duties,  turned  their 
attention  to  improvements  in  agriculture.  Such  were  the  Rev.  Manasseh  Cut¬ 
ler  and  Cotton  Tufts,  the  physician. 

The  practical  farmers  may  have  formed  a  considerable  element  in  the  mem¬ 
bership  of  the  Kennebec  and  the  Middlesex  Societies,  but  in  them,  as  well  as 
in  the  city  groups,  initiative  and  direction  came  from  the  professional  and 
business  men.  Their  interest  in  agriculture,  although  no  doubt  genuine,  was 
nevertheless  far  different  in  nature  and  in  intensity  from  that  of  the  inland 
farmer,  who  was  toiling  day  in  and  day  out  on  his  100  acres,  endeavoring  to 
make  a  living  for  himself  and  his  family.  The  point  of  view  of  the  “  literary  ” 

2  pp.  iii,  iv. 

3  Philadelphia  Society  for  Promoting  Agriculture,  Memoirs,  I  (1815),  pp.  iii,  v  (note). 


186 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


agriculturalist  was  expressed  by  General  (James?)  Warren.  In  the  American 
Museum  he  wrote : 4 

“  Agriculture  has  long  been  a  favourite  object  with  me.  In  a  philosophic  view,  it 
is  great  and  extensive;  in  a  political  view,  it  is  important,  and  perhaps  the  only  firm 
and  stable  foundation  of  greatness.  As  a  profession,  it  strengthens  the  mind,,  without 
enervating  the  body.  In  morals,  it  tends  to  increase  virtue,  without  introducing  vice. 
In  religion,  it  naturally  inspires  piety,  devotion,  and  a  dependence  on  providence,  with¬ 
out  a  tincture  of  infidelity.  It  is  a  rational  and  agreeable  amusement  to  a  man  of  leisure, 
and  a  boundless  source  of  contemplation  and  activity,  to  the  industrious.” 

WHAT  THEY  ACCOMPLISHED. 

The  “  literary  ”  or  “  learned  ”  agricultural  societies  were  pioneers  in  the 
great  task  of  agricultural  education.  In  their  Memoirs  and  Transactions  they 
put  before  the  public  periodically  an  account  of  the  best  agricultural  practice 
abroad,  as  well  as  the  results  of  experiments  in  scientific  agriculture  by  their 
members  in  this  country.  The  work  was  carefully  and  well  done.  The 
Memoirs  of  the  Philadelphia  Society  comprise  5  octavo  volumes,  issued  at 
irregular  intervals  over  a  period  of  18  years  (1808  to  1826).  The  Massachu¬ 
setts  Agricultural  Repository  and  Journal,  published  by  the  Massachusetts 
Society  for  Promoting  Agriculture,  makes  up  10  volumes  with  publication 
dates  ranging  from  1798  to  1832.  Taken  together  with  the  Transactions  of 
the  New  York  Society  for  the  Promotion  of  the  Useful  Arts  (4  vols.,  1801 
to  1819),  they  form  a  body  of  scientific  literature  which,  judged  by  the  state 
of  knowledge  of  the  time,  was  very  creditable.  But  as  far  as  reaching  the  “  dirt 
farmer  ”  and  influencing  his  practice  these  publications  were  failures.  The 
working  farmer  was  not  prepared  to  receive  his  education  in  the  form  of 
treatises  and  pamphlets. 

“The  improvements  proposed  fell  almost  dead  upon  the  people,  who  rejected  ‘book 
farming  ’  as  impertinent  and  useless,  and  knew  as  little  of  the  chemistry  of  agriculture 
as  of  the  problems  of  astronomy.”  5 

Besides  publishing  memoirs  and  transactions,  the  early  societies  offered  sub¬ 
stantial  premiums  for  the  discovery  and  description  of  methods  of  destroying 
insect  pests,  for  the  raising  of  grasses  and  trees  from  seeds,  and  for  new 
methods  of  soil  improvement.  But  here  again  competition  was  limited,  by  the 
very  nature  of  the  case,  to  a  small  number  of  educated  persons  with  leisure 
for  scientific  investigation.  Often  the  premium  money  remained  unclaimed 
in  the  societies’  treasuries.  The  Committee  on  Agricultural  Experiments  of 
the  Massachusetts  society  reported  in  1818: 6 

“With  respect  to  some  of  the  objects  to  which  the  public  attention  is  called,  under 
the  head  of  agricultural  experiments,  it  must  not  be  expected,  that  our  practical  farmers, 
generally,  will  contend  for  them  at  present.  What  has  been  almost  wholly  untried  or 
requires  uncommon  care,  should  first  be  attempted  and  proved  profitable  and  well 
suited  to  the  climate,  or  otherwise,  by  the  few  who  can  best  afford,  and  ought  not 
to  regard,  the  necessary  time  and  expense.” 

Some  of  the  papers  published  by  the  agricultural  societies  were  reprinted 
in  pamphlet  form.  Of  these  the  most  widely  circulated  were  Richard  Peters’s 
Agricultural  Inquiries  on  Plaster  of  Paris  (1797)  and  Livingston’s  Essay  on 

4 II  (1787),  P.  344-  .  ,  „  ,  n 

5  Flint,  in  Kettell,  Eighty  Years  Progress,  I,  25. 

6  Mass.  Agric.  Repository,  V  (1818-19),  p.  254. 


ORGANIZATION  AND  EDUCATION  OF  FARMERS  187 

Sheep  (1809).  The  interest  of  educated  people  in  agricultural  improvement 
was  responsible  for  the  publication  of  a  number  of  treatises  and  handbooks 
on  farming  in  the  years  after  the  close  of  the  Revolution,  in  which  an 
attempt  was  made  to  describe  the  best  English  practice,  occasionally  with 
suggestions  for  its  adaptation  to  American  conditions.7 

ELKANAH  WATSON  AND  THE  BERKSHIRE  AGRICULTURAL 

SOCIETY. 

In  1807  Elkanah  Watson  exhibited  in  the  public  square  at  Pittsfield, 
Massachusetts,  two  Merino  sheep,  thus  founding  the  cattle  show  or  fair,  an 
institution  which  was  destined  to  accomplish  much  for  American  agricul¬ 
ture.  Watson  was  a  well-to-do  New  Englander,  who  after  accumulating  a 
competency  in  commercial  enterprises  and  having  traveled  extensively0  in 
Europe,  bought  an  estate  near  Pittsfield  and  “retired  from  the  city  in 
pursuit  of  rural  occupations  and  felicity/’  Through  his  friendship  with 
Chancellor  Livingston  of  New  York  and  Colonel  David  Humphreys  of  Con¬ 
necticut,  he  had  become  interested  in  their  efforts  to  improve  the  quality  of 
American  wool  by  the  importation  of  Spanish  Merinoes.  His  exhibition 
seems  to  have  been  merely  an  attempt  to  interest  his  neighbors  in  the  improve¬ 
ment  of  their  flocks.  With  the  same  purpose  he  brought  to  his  farm  a  pair 
of  improved  swine  and  a  bull  of  English  stock,  whose  merits  he  diligently 
advertised  in  the  local  press.  A  few  years  later,  in  1810,  he  persuaded  25  of 
his  neighbors  to  join  him  in  an  exhibition  of  livestock  on  the  village  green. 
1  he  show  was  a  success  and  Watson  proceeded  to  make  it  an  annual  event  by 
the  organization  of  the  exhibitors  and  other  Pittsfield  farmers  into  the  Berk¬ 
shire  Agricultural  Society.  In  its  organization  and  methods  the  Berkshire 
society  furnished  a  striking  contrast  to  the  older,  or  literary,  societies.  It 
proved  so  successful  that  it  served  as  a  model  for  numerous  county  societies 
all  over  the  northern  States  between  1815  and  1840. 

Watson  saw  the  failure  of  the  older  societies  in  their  attempts  to  educate 
the  working  farmer  by  their  publications  and  premiums.  With  a  keen  insight 
into  human  nature  he  determined  to  approach  the  farmer  through  his  heart 
rather  than  his  head.  If  he  could  once  “  sieze  upon  the  farmer’s  heart  ”  and 
excite  a  spirit  of  competition  and  personal  ambition,  then  the  way  might  be 
prepared  for  books  and  science  as  auxiliaries.  The  cattle  show  was  therefore 
selected  as  the  chief  feature  of  the  new  society.  Cattle  shows  or  fairs  were 
not  an  original  idea  of  Watson  s.  They  were  utilized  as  agencies  for  agricul¬ 
tural  improvement  in  England  and  France  in  the  late  eighteenth  century  and 
had  been  visited  by  many  Americans,  perhaps  including  Watson,  on  European 
travels.  Nor  is  it  entirely  clear  that  he  was  the  first  to  introduce  the  cattle 
show  into  this  country,8  but  the  fact  is  certain  that  he  deserves  the  credit  for 
making  it,  in  combination  with  the  society  of  working  farmers,  a  successful 
agency  for  agricultural  progress  in  this  country. 

7  See  Bibliography,  p.  466. 

8  “Before  the  Revolution,  regular  Cattle  Fairs  were  held  in  the  town  of  Hardwick 

under  the  patronage  of  Timothy  Ruggles,  one  of  the  most  distinguished  men  of  our 
county  in  former  times.”  National  Aegis,  Worcester,  Massachusetts,  quoted  in 
New  England  Farmer,  VII  (1829),  p.  136.  I  have  been  unable  to  find  any  evidence 
to  confirm  this  statement. 


188 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


With  great  skill  Watson  enlisted  the  aid  of  the  farmers’  wives  and  of  the 
local  clergymen.  The  exhibition  of  farm  products  and  of  domestic  manu¬ 
factures  became  the  central  feature  in  an  elaborate  program,  which  included  a 
street  parade,  a  public  meeting  in  the  village  church  with  a  prayer,  an  address, 
singing  and,  to  end  the  festivities,  an  agricultural  ball  in  the  evening. 
The  new  organization,  although  established  on  a  sound  psychological  basis, 
had  a  hard  struggle  to  survive  in  its  early  years.  Its  organizer  was  met  with 
indifference  and  even  by  ridicule  by  his  neighbors.  The  financing  of  the 
annual  shows  proved  to  be  a  difficult  task.  Annual  memberships  at  $i  per 
year  did  not  yield  enough  to  cover  the  cost  of  the  premiums,  and  deficits 
were  paid  by  Watson  and  some  of  his  Boston  friends.  In  1814,  Watson 
resigned  as  president  of  the  society,  much  discouraged  at  its  apparent  failure. 

RAPID  SPREAD  OF  SOCIETIES  ON  THE  BERKSHIRE  PLAIN. 

Meanwhile  a  number  of  new  agricultural  societies  had  sprung  up.  In 
Windham  county,  Connecticut,  a  society  was  organized  in  1809.  In  Pennsyl¬ 
vania,  societies  were  in  existence  in  Bucks  and  Luzerne  Counties  in  1810,  and 
both  of  them  held  cattle  shows  in  1811.  In  New  Hampshire  societies  were 
organized  in  Hillsborough  (1812)  and  in  Rockingham  County  (1814).  In 
Massachusetts,  a  society  was  organized  (1811)  comprising  farmers  in  a  num¬ 
ber  of  towns  in  Worcester  County,  and  by  1815  there  were  in  that  state  at 
least  15  “town”  societies  in  existence.10  After  1815  the  movement  spread 
rapidly  until,  by  1820,  according  to  Watson’s  claim,  agricultural  societies  on 
the  Berkshire  plan  were  to  be  found  in  all  the  New  England  States  except 
Rhode  Island,  and  in  all  the  counties  of  those  States,  in  Pennsylvania,  Mary¬ 
land,  Virginia,  and  North  Carolina,  and  even  in  the  newer  states  of  Ohio  and 
Illinois.* 11  In  New  York,  where  Watson  had  been  especially  active  in  the 
work  of  propaganda  and  organization,  societies  had  been  formed  in  all  but  6 
of  the  58  counties.12  In  October  1819,  Watson  estimated  that  before  the  end 
of  that  month  there  would  be  in  operation  in  the  United  States  at  least  100 
societies.13  A  typical  instance  of  the  swiftness  with  which  the  new  societies 
were  organized  is  found  in  the  case  of  Bath,  Steuben  County,  New  York.  The 
farmers  of  the  township  were  considering  the  organization  of  a  society  and 
had  arranged  for  Watson  to  come  and  address  them.  On  his  arrival  he  was 
conducted  by  the  local  clergyman  to  the  court-house.  The  court  adjourned 
and  the  building  was  soon  filled  with  the  townsfolk,  including  ladies  in  the 
gallery.  A  prayer  was  offered  which  “  softened  the  hearts  of  the  audience.” 
Watson  then  made  an  address,  and  within  an  hour  sufficient  funds  were  sub¬ 
scribed  to  get  the  State  bounty  and  the  society  was  launched.14 


9  The  facts  regarding  Watson’s  life  and  work  are  taken  from  his  Memoirs,  edited  by 

his  son,  W.  C.  Watson,  and  from  his  own  History  of  the  Rise  of  Modern  Agricnl- 
tural  Societies. 

10  Larned,  Windham  County,  Conn.,  II,  449;  Penn.  Bd.  Agric.  Annual  Report  (1880), 

p.  229;  Penn.  Sec’y  of  Internal  Affairs,  3d  Annual  Report  ( 1874— 75 ) »  Part  III,  103; 
N.  H.  State  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions,  1850,  1851,  1852,  pp.  14-29;  Mass.  Agric. 
Repository,  III  (1815),  p.  80. 

11  Watson,  History  of  the  Rise  of  Modern  Agricultural  Societies,  180. 

12  Ibid.,  163. 

13  Ploughboy,  I  (1819-20),  p.  205. 

14  Rise  of  Modern  Agricultural  Societies,  164. 


ORGANIZATION  AND  EDUCATION  OF  FARMERS  189 

THE  POLICY  OF  STATE  AID. 

The  allotment  of  State  funds  to  county  societies  was  largely  responsible 
for  their  rapid  extension  in  the  years  from  1817  to  1825.  State  aid  to  agricul¬ 
ture  was  not  a  new  thing  in  the  nineteenth  century.  We  have  already  noted 
the  offering  of  bounties  on  a  number  of  products,  such  as  hemp,  silk,  and 
wool,  by  eighteenth  century  legislatures.15  In  Massachusetts,  the  Society  for 
Promoting  Agriculture  had  been  the  recipient  of  State  aid  since  its  founding 
in  1792,  but  New  Hampshire  was  the  first  State  to  extend  aid  to  the  newly 
formed  county  societies.  In  1817  the  legislature  of  that  State  granted  $100 
to  each  of  two  county  societies.  The  appropriation  was  increased  in  1818  and 
divided  among  5  societies.16  Massachusetts  and  New  York  both  embarked 
on  a  liberal  program  of  State  aid  in  1819.  The  former  offered  $200  annually 
to  every  society  which  should  raise  and  invest  a  fund  of  $1000  and  a  propor¬ 
tional  sum  for  greater  investments  up  to  $600  per  year.  Under  this  act  and 
its  amendments,  the  agricultural  societies  of  Massachusetts  received,  in  the 
years  1819  to  1845,  $n  5-8oo  from  the  State  treasury.17 

The  legislature  of  New  York  (act  of  7  April,  1819)  appropriated  $10,000 
a  year  for  2  years,  later  extended  to  4  years,  “  for  the  promotion  of  agricul¬ 
ture  and  family  domestic  manufactures.”  Quotas  ranging  from  $75  to  $500 
were  assigned  to  the  various  counties,  according  to  their  population.  The  law 
provided  that  the  amounts  granted  to  the  counties  should  be  equal  to  the 
funds  raised  by  their  members,  but  not  in  excess  of  their  quotas.  The  funds 
of  the  societies  were  to  be  expended  for  granting  premiums  at  their  annual 
fairs. 

In  the  years  1819  to  1825  the  funds  available  for  the  aid  of  agricultural 
societies  in  New  York  amounted  to  over  $60,000,  but  of  this  less  than  $43,000 
was  actually  paid  out,  the  balance  remaining  unclaimed  because  of  the  failure 
of  the  societies  in  some  counties  to  raise  funds  of  their  own  in  compliance 
with  the  terms  of  the  law.18  An  interesting  feature  of  the  New  York  law, 
which  was  found  also  in  the  New  Hampshire  law  of  1820,  was  the  establish¬ 
ment  of  a  State  board  of  agriculture  to  be  composed  of  the  presidents  of 
the  county  agricultural  societies  or  delegates  chosen  in  their  stead.  The  chief 
duty  of  this  board  was  the  publication  of  an  annual  volume  of  essays  and 
reports.19  Thus  the  ideal  of  the  older  “  literary  ”  societies  was  to  be  engrafted 
on  the  newer  county  organization.  In  Pennsylvania  a  State  agricultural  society, 
incorporated  in  1823,  with  State  aid,  performed  much  the  same  duties  as 
the  State  boards. 

THE  CLIMAX  OF  RURAL  ORGANIZATION. 

The  climax  of  rural  organization  was  reached  between  the  years  1820  and 
1825.  In  1822  the  repeal  of  State  aid  in  New  Hampshire  was  followed  in  a 
few  years  by  the  disappearance  of  all  its  societies.  In  New  York  the  with- 

15  See  p.  100  and  references  there  given. 

16  N.  H.  State  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions,  1850,  1851,  1852,  pp.  14-29. 

17  Mass.  Sec’y  of  the  Commonwealth,  Returns  of  the  Agricultural  Societies  (1845), 

p.  xi. 

18  N.  Y.  (State)  Senate  Journal,  49th  Session,  Jan.  1826,  pp.  176-183. 

19  N.  Y.  Bd.  Agric.,  Memoirs,  3  vols.  (1821  to  1826),  I  (1821),  p.  vii ;  N.  H.  State  Bd. 

Agric.,  A.  H.  Agricultural  Respository,  No.  1  (1822),  pp.  7-9;  Penn.  Agric.  Soc., 

Memoirs,  I  (1824),  pp.  xi-xv. 


190 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


drawal  of  State  funds  was  followed  by  the  wholesale  collapse  of  the  move¬ 
ment,  so  that  by  1830  only  one  county,  Jefferson,  still  supported  an  agricul¬ 
tural  society.20  In  Connecticut  and  in  Pennsylvania  only  a  few  societies  sur¬ 
vived  after  1825.  State  aid  in  Massachusetts  was  probably  largely  responsible 
for  the  continued  existence  of  a  number  of  county  societies,  but  even  in  that 
State  no  new  societies  were  organized  between  1823  and  1839. 21  West  of  the 
Alleghenies,  in  Ohio,  the  movement  gave  signs  of  continued  life  in  the  organ¬ 
ization  of  6  counties  in  the  years  1819  to  1833.  By  the  act  of  February  25, 
1833,  State  funds  were  made  available  with  the  result  that  societies  were 
founded  in  15  counties  between  that  date  and  1840. 22  In  Maine,  a  State  which 
like  Ohio  was  in  this  period  one  of  the  newer  agricultural  regions,  at  least 
two  societies  had  maintained  a  continuous  existence  from  1818  to  1832.  In  the 
latter  year  a  policy  of  State  aid  was  inaugurated,  resulting  in  the  organization 
of  6  counties  before  1840.23  A  revival  of  interest  in  agricultural  societies 
was  evident  in  a  few  counties  in  New  York  State  in  the  closing  years  of  the 
decade  1830-1840,  but  in  general  the  movement  remained  at  low  ebb  through¬ 
out  the  older  States. 

THE  CAUSES  OF  THE  RISE  AND  DECLINE  OF  COUNTY 

SOCIETIES. 

The  spectacular  rise  and  decline  of  county  agricultural  societies  in  this 
period  should  be  related  to  the  great  variety  of  “  reform  ”  movements  which 
were  in  the  air  at  the  time.  The  facility  with  which  the  Americans  organized 
for  all  sorts  of  purposes  was  remarked  by  De  Tocqueville.24  In  1840  he  wrote : 

“Americans  of  all  ages,  all  conditions,  and  all  dispositions,  constantly  form  asso¬ 
ciations.  They  have  not  only  commercial  and  manufacturing  companies,  in  which  all 
take  part,  but  associations  of  a  thousand  other  kinds —religious,  moral,  serious,  futile, 
extensive  or  restricted,  enormous  or  diminutive.  The  Americans  make  associations  to 
give  entertainments,  to  found  establishments  for  education,  to  build  inns,  to  construct 
churches,  to  diffuse  books,  to  send  missionaries  to  the  antipodes;  and  in  this  manner 
they  found  hospitals,  prisons,  and  schools.  If  it  be  proposed  to  advance  some  truth, 
or  to  foster  some  feeling  by  the  encouragement  of  a  great  example,  they  form  a  society. 
Wherever,  at  the  head  of  some  new  undertaking,  you  see  the  Government  in  France, 
or  a  man  of  rank  in  England,  in  the  United  States  you  will  be  sure  to  find  an 
association.” 

In  the  case  of  the  agricultural  societies  the  natural  tendency  toward  organ¬ 
ization  was  stimulated  by  the  policy  of  State  aid,  and  consequently  the  move¬ 
ment  spread  far  ahead  of  the  real  need  for  it,  i.  e.,  ahead  of  the  appreciation 
and  desire  for  organization  on  the  part  of  practical  farmers.  As  in  the  case 
of  later  associations  of  farmers,  such  as  the  Patrons  of  Husbandry,  those 
who  rushed  to  join  entertained  exaggerated  hopes  of  the  benefits  they  would 
receive.  When  the  first  flush  of  enthusiasm  had  faded  and  none  of  their 
vague  anticipations  had  materialized,  their  support  wavered.  When  eventu¬ 
ally  the  support  from  the  State  treasuries  was  withdrawn  the  whole  flimsy 
fabric  collapsed. 

20 N.  Y.  Farmer ,  III  (1830),  p.  295. 

21  Mass.  Sec’y  of  the  Commonwealth,  Returns  of  the  Agricultural  Societies  (1845),  p.  x. 

22  Ohio  State  Bd.  Agric.  Brief  History,  9-24. 

23  Maine  Bd.  of  Agric.  1st  Annual  qeport  (1st  ed.,  1856),  pp.  15-17. 

24  Democracy  in  America,  III,  220.  See  also  Turner,  Rise  of  the  New  West,  6. 


ORGANIZATION  AND  EDUCATION  OF  FARMERS 


191 


RELATION  OF  RURAL  ORGANIZATION  TO  GENERAL 

INDUSTRIAL  CONDITIONS. 

The  relation  of  the  earliest  movement  for  rural  organization  to  general 
industrial  conditions  is  significant.  Although  begun  in  a  period  of  rising  prices, 
the  greatest  activity  of  the  county  societies,  as  of  later  agrarian  movements, 
came  in  a  period  of  rapidly  falling  prices.  Farmers  who  were  still  in  a  self- 
sufficient  economy  were  not  greatly  afifected  by  price  changes,  but  to  those 
who  were  at  this  time  taking  the  first  steps  in  the  transition  to  commercial 
agriculture,  the  decline  in  the  prices  of  beef  and  pork,  butter  and  cheese,  wool, 
wheat,  and  corn  brought  distress.  With  vague  hopes  they  turned  for  relief 
to  the  county  societies.  But  in  the  latter’s  campaign  for  better  farming  the 


The  index  number  of  general  prices  for  the  years  1801  to  1824  is  taken  from  Hansen’s 
article  in  American  Statistical  Association,  Quarterly  Publications,  XIV  (1914-15), 
p.  808.  The  figure  for  1809  I  have  supplied  independently,  using  identical  data  and 
methods.  For  the  years  1825—1863  the  index  number  is  based  on  the  yearly  average  of 
Few  York  wholesale  prices  of  74  commodities  quoted  in  the  Report  of  the  Secretary 
of  the '  Treasury  for  1863.  A  weighted  index  number  with  base  i860  computed  from  this 
material  was  published  by  Juergens  in  American  Statistical  Association,  Quarterly 
Publications,  XII  (1910-11),  pp.  544-557. 

In  computing  the  index  of  farm  products  for  1801—1824  the  prices  of  the  following 
commodities  were  used beef ,  beans,  bacon,  butter,  cheese,  flaxseed,  flour,  barley,  corn, 
rje,  oats,  hemp,  hops,  hides,  lard,  cornmeal,  pork,  tobacco.  These  prices  were  obtained 
from  manuscript  data  furnished  by  Professor  Hansen,  not  published  in  his  article.  For 
the  years  1825-1863  the  commodities  making  up  the  farm-price  index  are:  beef,  butter, 
cheese,  wheat,  corn,  rye,  oats,  hops,  hides,  lard,  cornmeal,  pork,  tobacco,  and  wool. 
Both  indices  are  simple  arithmetical  averages.  The  index  numbers  are  presented  in 
tabular  form  on  page  493  of  the  Statistical  Appendix. 

farmers  found  little  comfort.  What  they  wanted  to  know  was  not  how  to  grow 
greater  crops  and  fatter  animals  (irrespective  of  cost),  but  how  and  where 
to  sell  what  they  already  had  produced.  Such  knowledge  the  societies  were 
not  prepared  to  supply.  In  favoring  the  withdrawal  of  State  aid  from  the  New 
York  societies,  a  legislative  committee  called  attention  to  the  prevailing  busi¬ 
ness  depression  and  said : 

“Agricultural  products  especially,  if  remote  from  market,  will  net  but  very  little; 
and  these  appropriations  necessarily  increase  the  taxes  upon  the  agriculturist,  whose 


192 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


crops,  when  raised,  will  hardly  be  sufficient  to  pay  them.  Were  these  societies  calculated 
to  raise  the  price  and  value  of  crops,  as  well  as  to  increase  their  quantity,  they  wou  d 
perhaps  be  entitled  to  additional  consideration.”  25 

DISREGARD  OF  PRODUCTION  COSTS  IN  AWARDING 

PREMIUMS. 

The  neglect  of  economic  considerations  by  the  societies  in  the  distribution 
of  their  premiums  was  at  the  bottom  of  much  of  the  indifference  and  even 
hostility  with  which  they  were  regarded  by  working  farmers.  Complaints  were 
frequent  that  the  societies  were  undemocratic  institutions.  However  much 
to  be  deplored,  it  cannot  be  disguised,”  said  the  speaker  at  the  1823  cattle 
show  of  the  Berkshire  (Massachusetts)  society,26  “that  there  is  a  lurking 

jealousy  and  ill-will  toward  these  societies . ”  The  working  farmers 

did  not  feel  kindly  toward  the  gentlemen  farmers  who  usually  held  the  offices 
in  the  societies  and  took  all  the  premiums.  But  their  attitude  was  not  mean 
envy.  They  showed  a  justifiable  disgust  at  the  award  of  premiums  to  livestock 
and  crops  without  regard  to  the  costs  involved  in  producing  the  specimens. 
Naturally,  they  had  no  chance  in  a  competition  purely  of  production.  A 
Dutchess  County  farmer  wrote  to  the  New  York  Board  of  Agriculture  as 

follows : 27 

“I  have  killed,  without  any  other  feeding  than  was  common  to  my  working  oxen 
and  cows,  two  stag  steers  short  of  four  years  old,  the  beef  of  which  weighed  about 
900  lbs.  and  in  New-York  sold  for  $8  and  $9  per  cwt.  and  made  beautiful  beef,  although 
they  were  bulls  until  after  they  were  two  years  old.  And  yet  if  I  was  to  exhibit  my 
stock  (which  for  beauty  of  form  cannot  be  exceeded,)  I  am  persuaded,  from  the  ex¬ 
amples  I  have  seen,  that  the  premiums  would  be  awarded  to  some  ill-formed,  over-fed, 
monstrous  animal,  that  has  been  fed  for  the  purpose,  in  a  manner  that,  if  adopted  by 
any  farmer,  would  ruin  him ;  while  the  raising  of  stock  according  to  my  method,  would 
be  one  of  the  most  profitable  articles  that  could  engage  the  attention  of  a  piactical 

farmer.  <  . 

“  The  above  is  so  well  understood  to  be  the  manner  in  which  the  state  bounty  is  dis¬ 
posed  of,  that  very  few  of  the  best  practical  farmers  in  this  part  of  the  country  will 
become  members  of  agricultural  societies,  or  attend  their  exhibitions.” 

WHAT  THE  COUNTY  SOCIETIES  ACCOMPLISHED. 

In  spite  of  many  defects,  the  county  societies  of  this  period  should  be  cred¬ 
ited  with  valuable  accomplishments.  Their  annual  cattle  shows  were  the  first 
agencies  for  agricultural  education  which  had  a  popular  appeal.  The  exhioi- 
tion  of  Merino  sheep,  of  English  cattle,  and  of  new  tools  and  machines  spread 
the  knowledge  of  these  improvements  among  practical  farmers  more  rapidly 
than  could  any  other  existing  institution.  For  example,  the  introduction  in 
the  years  1820  to  1830  of  the  cast-iron  plows  was  much  hastened  by  their 
exhibition  and  practical  demonstration  in  the  plowing  matches  at  the  shows. 
The  annual  addresses  contained  flowery  rhetoric  and  copious  references  to 

25  N.  Y.  Assembly  Journal,  44th  session  (1820-21),  p.  842.  .  . 

26  N.  E.  Farmer,  II  (1823-24),  p.  212.  See  also  Mass.  Agricultural  Repository,  A 

(1828-32),  p.  103.  .  0 

27  Memoirs,  II  (1823),  p.  188.  See  also  N.  H.  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions,  1850,  1851,  i«o2, 

p.  29;  N.  Y.  Fanner,  VII  (1834),  p.  151;  Welby,  in  Thwaites,  Early  Western 

Travels,  XII,  320. 


ORGANIZATION  AND  EDUCATION  OF  FARMERS  193 

Pliny,  Columella,  and  Virgil  which  passed  harmlessly  over  the  heads  of  the 
majority  of  the  audience.  Much  of  the  advice  which  the  speakers  gave  was 
fortunately  neglected,  such,  for  instance,  as  the  exhortations  to  plant  hemp 
and  to  raise  silkworms,  and,  in  New  England,  to  grow  wheat. 

The  social  and  recreational  features  of  the  cattle  shows,  early  emphasized 
by  Watson,  were  perhaps  no  less  important  than  the  purely  educational.  They 
satisfied  the  farmers  need  for  more  social  contacts  and,  on  the  whole,  they 
can  hardly  have  failed  to  stimulate  better  farming.  Even  if  the  majority  of 
attending  farmers  disdained  to  compete  for  premiums,  their  ambition  must 
have  been  stirred.  Moreover,  the  association  in  each  county  of  hundreds  of 
farmers  in  an  organization  of  their  own  must  have  given  rise  to  a  new  com¬ 
munity  of  interest  and  have  created  a  new  feeling  of  their  importance  as  an 
economic  group. 

REVIVAL  OF  STATE  AID— CROP  BOUNTIES— AGRICULTURAL 

SURVEYS. 

The  years  1835  to  1840  mark  the  beginning  of  a  new  era  in  the  policy  of 
State  aid  to  agriculture.  State  legislatures  were  besought  on  all  sides  for  ap¬ 
propriations,  for  the  aid  of  county  societies,  for  the  establishment  of  State 
boards  of  agriculture,  for  agricultural  schools,  for  the  collection  of  informa¬ 
tion,  for  crop  bounties,  and  for  the  eradication  of  insect  pests.  In  New  York, 
the  State  capitol  was  besieged  each  year  by  a  State  agricultural  society  and 
a  State  agricultural  convention,  pointedly  holding  their  meetings  at  Albany 
while  the  legislature  was  in  session.  In  1841  the  lawmakers  capitulated,  grant¬ 
ing  a  substantial  appropriation  for  agricultural  purposes.28 

In  Massachusetts  and  in  Maine  the  State  legislatures  revived  the  old  policy 
of  direct  subsidies  to  encourage  the  production  of  certain  crops.  Massachu¬ 
setts  in  three  years,  1838  to  1840,  paid  out  $27,900  in  bounties  for  the  produc¬ 
tion  of  288,065  bushels  of  wheat.29 

The  experiment,  as  this  result  proves,  was  a  failure.  And  although  each  claimant 
for  the  bounty  was  obliged  to  make  a  minute  statement  of  his  process  of  culture,  no 
new  light  was  obtained  of  practical  importance.  There  was  much  complaint  of  injury 
to  the  crop  by  drought,  grain  insect,  smut,  &c.,  and  but  little  enterprise  and  perseverance 
shown  in  continuing  its  cultivation.”  30 

A  bounty  on  the  production  of  raw  silk  was  also  ineffective.  In  the  5  years 
1836  to  1840,  when  bounties  were  offered,  $2,430  was  paid  out  on  14,160 
pounds  of  cocoons,  956  pounds  of  reeled  silk,  and  344  pounds  of  thrown  silk. 
In  Maine  a  bounty  on  wheat  was  offered  in  1837  and  in  1838  a  bounty  on 
corn.  Both  acts  were  repealed  in  1839  after  claims  amounting  to  $231,500.86 
had  been  paid.31 

AGRICULTURAL  PERIODICALS. 

The  origin  of  the  American  agricultural  press,  comprising  weekly  and 
monthly  journals  devoted  wholly  or  in  large  part  to  agricultural  interests,  falls 

28  N.  Y.  State  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions,  XXIII  (1863),  pp.  151-155. 

29  Massachusetts  Legislative  Documents,  1841,  Senate  Doc.  No.  25,  House  Doc  No  40 

(1839). 

30  Mass.  Bd.  Agric.  gth  Annual  Report  (1861),  p.  123. 

81  Maine  Legislative  Documents  (1843),  Treasurer's  Report,  12. 


194 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


in  the  second  and  third  decades  of  the  nineteenth  century.  The  first  Amer¬ 
ican  “  farm  paper  ”  was  the  American  Farmer,  which  began  in  Baltimore  in 
1819  a  career  of  continuous  publication  lasting  until  1833.  The  N ew  England 
Farmer,  established  in  1822,  The  New  York  Farmer  (1826),  The  Genesee 
Farmer\  1831),  The  Cultivator  (1834),  The  Maine  Farmer  (1835),  were  all 
ably  conducted  and  widely  read.  In  addition  there  sprang  up  in  the  years  1830 
to  1840  a  number  of  short-lived  journals,  published  principally  in  western 
cities.  Altogether  there  were  more  than  30  agricultural  periodicals  in  circula¬ 
tion  at  the  end  of  the  period,  with,  perhaps,  100,000  readers.32 

There  was  much  in  the  early  periodicals  which  was  but  poorly  adapted  to 
the  needs  and  understanding  of  the  mass  of  rural  people.  A  letter  to  the 
New  England  Farmer  33  complains 

“there  is  so  little  matter  in  it  of  use  to  the  small,  poor,  middle-interest  farmer.  .  .  . 
and  there  is  so  much  about  flowers,  tulips,  geraniums,  etc.,  etc. ,  and  so  much  about 
this  and  that  great  farm,  managed  by  the  rich  and  opulent,  all  of  which  is  beyond  the 
reach  and  calculated  to  discourage  the  great  mass . ” 

On  the  whole,  however,  they  were  important  educational  agents.  They 
cooperated  with  the  agricultural  societies,  publishing  their  premium  lists  and 
announcing  their  awards.  They  printed  extensive  accounts  of  the  annual 
cattle  shows,  with  excerpts  from  many  of  the  addresses.  They  reprinted  ex¬ 
tensively  the  more  important  English  agricultural  treatises ;  they  gave  sum¬ 
maries  of  foreign  and  domestic  news.  By  quoting  regularly  the  prices  of  farm 
products  in  the  principal  city  markets,  they  attempted  to  keep  their  readers 
in  touch  with  price  fluctuations  and  market  conditions. 


AGRICULTURAL  SCHOOLS. 

A  beginning  was  made  in  formal  instruction  in  agriculture  in  American 
educational  institutions  in  I792>  when  a  professorship  of  natural  history, 
chemistry,  and  agriculture  was  established  at  Columbia  University.  The  funds 
for  the  support  of  the  new  chair  came  in  part  at  least  from  an  appropriation 
by  the  New  York  legislature.  It  was  not  until  1822,  however,  that  there  was 
opened  at  Gardiner,  Maine,  the  first  American  institution  devoted  exclusively 
to  training  young  men  for  the  vocation  of  farming.  The  Gardiner  Lyceum, 
named  from  its  founder  and  principal  benefactor,  Robert  Hallowell  Gardiner, 
opened  its  doors  in  January  1823,  with  a  faculty  of  one,  a  lecturer  in  natural 
philosophy.  By  February  1828,  there  had  been  under  instruction  191  students. 
The  elective  system,  short  winter  courses,  and  an  experimental  farm,  where 
students  might  earn  a  part  of  their  board,  were  notable  features  of  the  school. 
The  Maine  legislature  voted  $2,000  of  State  funds  to  the  lyceum  in  1823  and 
continued  the  appropriations  until  1831.  After  that  date  the  school  lost  its 
distinctive  agricultural  character.34 

Schools  for  farmers’  sons  were  actively  discussed  in  other  New  England 
States,  and  in  Connecticut,  at  Derby,  a  school,  opened  in  1824,  seems  to  have 
had  considerable  success  for  a  year  or  two. 


32  Estimates  of  Jesse  Buel,  in  The  Cidtivator,  V  (1838-39),  p.  29;  VI  (1839-40),  p.  67. 
,  33  XVII  (1838-1839),  p.  406.  .  , 

34  See  Stevens,  America’s  First  Agricultural  School,  in  Scientific  Monthly,  XIII,  No.  0 
(Dec.  1921),  pp.  531-540. 


ORGANIZATION  AND  EDUCATION  OF  FARMERS 


195 


The  agitation  for  agricultural  training  had  become  so  pronounced  that  many  private 
enterprises  took  advantage  of  it  to  organize  schools.  Into  these  schools  were  incorporated 
more  or  less  of  the  new  doctrines  ot  manual  labor,  application  of  science,  training  for 
occupation,  democracy  of  education,  while  usually  holding  in  the  main  to  the  classical 
or  literary  routine  as  a  framework  or  background.  Some  of  these  institutions  were  no 
ou  t  more  or  less  speculative.  Some  of  them  were  pretentious  in  their  announcements 
and  were  likely  to  assume  the  name  of  college,  but  they  were  what  we  would  now 
call  private  schools.”  85 

The  ideas  of  vocational  training  in  agriculture  developed  by  Fellenberg 
in  Switzerland  were  incorporated  in  the  policies  of  a  number  of  American 
schools,  notably  those  founded  at  Bristol,  Bucks  County,  Pennsylvania,  in 
i83i,  stid  Whitesborough,  Oneida  County,  New  York,  in  the  same  year. 
A  cardinal  feature  of  these  schools  was  the  insistence  on  manual  labor  by  the 
students.  At  the  Rensselaer  Polytechnic  Institute  at  Troy,  New  York,  in¬ 
struction  in  agriculture  was  given  at  first  according  to  Fellenberg’s  methods, 
but  later  the  manual  requirement  was  abandoned. 

The  idea  of  a  State  agricultural  college  was  given  a  great  deal  of  discussion 
in  the  agricultural  periodicals  and  in  the  annual  addresses  of  the  agricultural 
societies.  In  New  York  the  State  society  in  1833  outlined  a  plan  for  a  school 
and  a  farm  to  be  supported  by  State  funds,  and  the  next  year  a  joint  committee 
of  the  legislature  reported  favorably  a  bill  to  carry  out  the  plan,  but  no  action 
was  taken.36  It  was  not  until  the  decade  before  the  Civil  War  that  the  State 
agricultural  schools  became  a  reality.37 

35  Bailey,  in  Bailey,  Cyclopedia  of  American  Agriculture  IV  377 
It  N.  Y.  Farmer,  VI  (1833),  p.  84;  VII  (1834),  p.  151. 

-  Many  of  the  facts  in  this  section  have  been  taken  from  the  article  by  L.  H.  Bailey, 
ducation  by  Means  of  Agriculture,  in  Bailey’s  Cyclopedia  of  American  Agriculture, 
IV,  chapter  VIII.  I  have  also  used  A.  C.  True’s  article,  Agricultural  Education  in 
the  United  States,  in  U.  S.  Dept.  Agric.  Yearbook  (1899),  pp.  157-190. 


Chapter  XV. — Foreign  Trade  and  the  Home 

Market. 

DECLINE  IN  RELATIVE  IMPORTANCE  OF  EXPORTS  OF 

FARM  PRODUCTS. 

Export  trade  in  farm  products  was  relatively  of  less  importance  to  the 
northern  farmer  in  the  early  decades  of  the  nineteenth  century  than  in  the 
late  colonial  period.  Then  the  foreign  market  had  offered  practically  his 
sole  opportunity  for  sales,  but  now  shipments  to  the  West  Indies  and  to 
Europe  were  overshadowed  by  sales  to  the  manufacturing  villages  at  home. 
The  period  1790  to  1807  was  characterized  by  a  large  European  demand  for 
American  breadstuffs,  to  supply  the  deficiencies  caused  by  war  and  crop  fail¬ 
ures.  At  this  time,  too,  England  was  forced,  owing  to  the  war-time  interrup¬ 
tion  of  communication  with  her  colonial  possessions  in  America,  to  tempo¬ 
rarily  remove  the  restrictions  on  exports  from  the  United  States  to  the  West 
Indies.1 


Table  28. — Average  annual  exports  of  selected  farm  products. 

[Source:  U.  S.  Commerce  and  Navigation  Reports.  See  tables  66  and  67,  pp.  493,  494-] 


Year. 

Wheat,  a 
thousands  of 
bushels. 

Corn, b 
thousands  of 
bushels. 

Pork  and  c 
pork  products, 
thousands  of 
pounds. 

Butter  and 
cheese, thou¬ 
sands  of 
pounds. 

Beef  and 
tallow,  thou¬ 
sands  of 
pounds. 

1791 

to  1807. . . . 

4,169 

1,838 

14,289 

2,786 

17,334 

1808 

1814. . . . 

4,214 

i,457 

5,590 

1,677 

8009 

1815 

1820. . . . 

4,695 

1,379 

12,042 

1,546 

7,012 

1821 

1830. . . . 

4,Il6 

1,322 

21,130 

1,951 

14532 

1831 

1840. . . . 

4,446 

1,035 

20,730 

1,734 

8,510 

This  table  shows  exports  from  Baltimore,  New  Orleans,  and  other  southern  ports,  as  well  as  from 
the  ports  of  Northern  States. 

a  Including  wheat  equivalent  of  flour  exports. 
b  Including  corn  equivalent  of  corn-meal  expoits. 
c  Pork,  hams,  bacon,  and  lard. 

Foreign  trade  was  subject  to  serious  interruption  in  the  years  1808  to  1814, 
first  by  the  embargo  and  non-intercourse  acts  and  then  by  the  War  of  1812. 
After  1815  the  disposal  of  stocks  accumulated  during  the  war  caused  large 
exports  to  Europe  for  a  few  years,  but  the  temporary  prosperity  was  soon 
brought  to  an  end  by  the  crisis  of  1819.  In  the  remaining  20  years  conditions 
in  both  the  European  and  West  India  markets  were  not  favorable  to  our  export 
trade.  Europe,  now  at  peace,  was  able  to  supply  her  own  breadstuffs.  In 
England  the  corn  laws  imposed  heavy  duties  on  the  import  of  foreign  wheat. 
The  trade  with  the  British  West  Indies,  according  to  the  commercial  treaty 
of  July  1815,  was  to  be  regulated  as  either  nation  (i.  e.,  England  or  the  United 
States)  desired.  The  result  was  that  shipments  of  American  flour,  provisions, 


1  See  p.  135- 
196 


FOREIGN  TRADE  AND  HOME  MARKET 


197 


corn,  rice,  lumber,  and  livestock  were  limited,  and  American  ships  were  ex¬ 
cluded  from  the  ports  of  the  British  Islands.  The  United  States  replied  by 
forbidding  the  exportation  of  these  supplies  in  British  vessels.  Direct  inter¬ 


course  being  thus  at  an  end,  the  islands  were  nevertheless  supplied  in  rounda¬ 
bout  fashion  through  the  ports  of  Swedish  and  Danish  colonies.  Not  until 
1830  did  the  final  adjustment  of  the  controversy  again  permit  direct  trade.2 


Fig.  ii. — Exports  of  wheat  and  corn  (including  wheat,  flour  and  cornmeal),  1791-1846. 


The  fluctuations  in  the  principal  exports  of  northern  produce  are  shown 
in  figures  10,  11,  and  12.  The  data  from  which  the  charts  were  prepared  will 
be  found  on  pages  493  and  494. 

THE  HOME  MARKET.— ITS  SIGNIFICANCE. 

In  the  first  half  of  the  nineteenth  century  an  industrial  revolution  was  in 
progress  in  our  Eastern  States,  comparable  in  its  significance  and  in  many  of 

2  See  Johnson,  et  al.,  Domestic  and  Foreign  Commerce  of  United  States,  II,  chs.  XXIII 
and  XXIV ;  American  State  Papers,  Commerce  and  Navigation,  II,  631. 


198 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


its  characteristics  to  the  industrial  revolution  in  England  of  the  last  half  of 
the  preceding  century.  On  this  side  of  the  Atlantic  as  on  that,  power  machinery 
replaced  hand  tools,  and  the  processes  of  manufacture  were  transferred  from 
the  farmhouses  and  from  the  shops  of  craftsmen  to  factories.  Manufacturing 
split  off  from  agriculture,  and  there  arose  a  specialized  non-agricultural  class 
in  the  community,  consumers  but  not  producers  of  farm  products.  The  foreign 
market  after  1815  was  shrinking,  and  at  best  it  had  been  casual  and  precarious. 
But  now  a  sure  and  growing  market  was  established,  as  it  were,  at  the  farmers’ 
very  door. 

The  importance  to  agricultural  development  of  the  home  market  thus 
created  can  hardly  be  overemphasized.3  By  giving  the  farmer  an  opportunity 


near  at  hand  to  sell  his  produce  it  did  what  all  the  exhortations  of  agricultural 
societies  and  publicists  had  failed  to  do.  It  stimulated  increased  production, 
better  tillage,  and  improvement  of  livestock.  Self-sufficing  farming  was 
given  up.  The  farmer,  having  something  to  sell,  could  now  buy  his  clothes, 
furniture,  and  tools.  He  got  better  goods  at  less  cost  and  his  standard  of  living 
rose.  Like  manufacturing,  agriculture  became  an  independent,  specialized 
industry.  By  becoming  less  of  a  jack-of-all-trades,  the  farmer  became  more 
of  a  farmer.  He  became  more  efficient  by  specialization.  The  development  of 
the  market  caused  also  a  territorial  division  of  labor  in  agriculture.  Under 
the  old  conditions  all  the  products  consumed  in  a  locality  had  to  be  raised 
there,  but  when  the  opportunity  of  profitable  sale  was  afforded,  each  locality 

3  The  “  home  market  ”  received  much  attention  from  economists  and  politicians  in  the 
years  1820  to  1840.  The  necessity  of  tariff  protection  to  manufactures  in  order  to 
stimulate  agriculture  was  the  basis  of  Clay’s  “  American  system.”  The  superiority 
of  the  home  market  to  the  foreign  market  was  strongly  emphasized  by  Henry 
Carey,  the  foremost  American  economist  of  his  day,  in  his  Principles  of  Social 
Science,  II,  28-31. 


FOREIGN  TRADE  AND  HOME  MARKET 


199 


tended  to  concentrate  its  attention  on  the  products  for  which  it  was  best 
fitted  on  account  of  soil  and  climate  and  location  in  respect  to  market.  And 
so  by  the  fuller  utilization  of  the  advantages  of  each  locality,  the  productivity 
of  farming  was  increased. 

But  all  these  remarkable  changes  did  not  happen  at  once.  In  fact,  all  the 
possible  advantages  of  commercial  agriculture  have  not  yet  been  completely 
realized.  In  the  period  under  consideration  only  their  beginnings  can  be  traced. 
The  market  at  first  developed  but  slowly,  and  farmers,  for  a  great  many 
reasons,  were  slow  to  take  advantage  of  their  new  opportunities.  Conserva¬ 
tive,  with  but  little  scientific  knowledge,  and  perhaps  even  less  business  experi¬ 
ence,  they  not  unnaturally  hesitated  and  clung  to  the  old  ways.  Gradually  they 
gave  up  household  manufactures  and  modified  their  farm  management  to 
meet  market  demands,  and  then  came  the  competition  of  the  West  in  grain, 
provisions,  and  wool,  which  upset  many  of  their  calculations  and  forced  a 
reconsideration  of  their  problems. 


INCREASING  DENSITY  OF  POPULATION  IN  THE  EAST. 

Statistical  evidence  of  the  growth  of  a  home  market  is  found  in  the  increas¬ 
ing  density  of  population  east  of  the  Alleghenies  and  in  the  beginnings  of 
urban  concentration. 


Table  29. — Population  east  of  Allegheny  Mountains,  1790  to  1840. 

[Thousands  of  people.] 


1790. 

1800. 

1810. 

1820. 

1830. 

1840. 

Maine  . 

97 

142 

85 

379 

69 

238 

184 

339 

325 

152 

184 

154 

423 

69 

251 

211 

572 

405 

229 

214 

218 

472 

77 

262 

246 

884 

520 

298 

244 

236 

523 

83 

275 

278 

1,107 

659 

399 

269 

281 

610 

97 

298 

321 

1,512 

819 

502 

285 

292 

738 

108 

310 

373 

1,881 

995 

New  Hampshire  . 

Vermont  . 

Massachusetts  . 

Rhode  Island  . 

Connecticut  . 

New  Jersey  . 

Eastern  New  York3 . 

Eastern  Pennsylvania  b  . 

Total®  . 

1,858 

2,421 

3,122 

3,704 

4,607 

5,484 

Density  per  Square  Mile  at  Successive  Census  Dates. 


Maine  . 

3-2 

5-i 

77 

10.0 

134 

16.8 

New  Hampshire  . 

15-7 

20.4 

237 

27.0 

29.8 

3i-5 

Vermont  . 

9.4 

16.9 

23.9 

25-9 

30.8 

320 

Massachusetts  . 

47.1 

52.6 

58.7 

65.1 

75-9 

917 

Rhode  Island  . 

64-5 

64.8 

72.1 

77-8 

91. 1 

102.0 

Connecticut  . 

49.4 

52.1 

54-3 

57-i 

61.8 

64-3 

New  Jersey  . 

24.5 

28.1 

32.7 

36.9 

42.7 

497 

Eastern  New  York . 

9-5 

16.0 

247 

30.9 

42.2 

52.5 

Eastern  Pennsylvania  . 

15-4 

19.1 

24-5 

3i.i 

38.6 

47-0 

Summary  . 

147 

19.1 

24.7 

29-3 

364 

42.9 

a  See  note  a,  Table  22,  p.  152. 
b  See  note  b,  Table  22.  p.  152. 
c  Including  fractions  of  thousands. 


200  AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 

The  increase  of  the  manufacturing  and  commercial  population  was  rapid 
after  1810,  and  in  some  localities  the  whole  gain  in  numbers  between  1810 
and  1840  was  thus  explained.  In  southern  New  England  (Massachusetts, 
Rhode  Island,  and  Connecticut)  in  1810  there  were  811,000  people;  by  1840 
this  number  had  increased  to  1,157,000.  Analysis  of  the  history  of  the  com¬ 
mercial  and  manufacturing  communities  shows  that  their  growth  explains  the 
entire  increase.  The  population  of  agricultural  townships,  on  the  other  hand, 
showed  a  tendency  to  decline.4  In  Northern  New  England  little  manufactur¬ 
ing  had  developed  before  1840  and  the  gain  in  population  was  therefore 
largely  agricultural. 


URBAN  CONCENTRATION. 

Selecting  as  urban  centers  all  communities  of  over  8,000  5  people,  we  find 
in  1790,  in  the  territory  north  of  Maryland  and  east  of  the  Alleghenies,  only 
three  such  towns,  Boston,  New  York,  and  Philadelphia.  Their  combined 
population  was  less  than  80,000  and  made  up  but  4*2  per  cent  of  the  total.  In 
1840  there  were  in  the  same  territory  33  urban  communities,  whose  combined 
population  was  nearly  1,000,000,  or  17.9  per  cent  of  the  total.  West  of  the 
Alleghenies  in  the  northern  region  there  were  no  towns  of  8,000  in  1790.  In 
1840  there  were  7 ;  Buffalo,  Rochester,  Pittsburg,  Allegheny,  Cincinnati,  Louis¬ 
ville,  and  St.  Louis,  with  a  combined  population  of  about  150,000.  The  loca¬ 
tion  of  urban  centers  and  their  relative  size  is  indicated  in  figure  13. 

In  1790,  Boston  had  18,000  inhabitants;  in  1840  there  were  in  the  city 
93,000,  and  in  the  surrounding  suburban  area  (towns  whose  central  points 
were  not  more  than  10  miles  distant)  about  80,000  more.  New  York  had 
grown  from  33,000  to  313,000.  Its  suburban  area  (including  the  adjoining 
counties.  Queens,  Kings,  Richmond,  and  Westchester  and  portions  of  Essex 
and  Union  counties  in  New  Jersey)  contained  about  half  a  million  people,  a 
large  part  of  whom  were  purchasers  of  farm  products.  The  density  of  popu¬ 
lation  in  this  area  averaged  400  to  the  square  mile.  Philadelphia,  including 
the  county  as  well  as  the  city,  had  55,000  in  179°  and  258,000  in  1840. 

THE  INFLUENCE  OF  THE  HOME  MARKET. 

The  beginnings  of  better  farming  in  the  East  were  found  principally  in 
the  neighborhood  of  the  three  largest  towns— Boston,  New  York,  and  Phila¬ 
delphia.  In  these  suburban  areas  the  farmers,  stimulated  by  the  educational 
and  inspirational  propaganda  of  the  agricultural  societies  and  encouraged  by 
rising  prices,  made  substantial  progress.  They  improved  their  soil  with  gyp¬ 
sum  and  clover,  and  they  improved  their  sheep  and  cattle  by  importation  of 
European  breeds.  But  about  1820  export  markets  failed,  prices  collapsed, 
and  the  agricultural  societies  went  out  of  business.  Agricultural  improvement 
must  have  received  a  severe  set-back  had  it  not  been  for  the  new  home  market, 
which  at  this  time  was  just  beginning  to  make  itself  felt. 

4  Bid  well,  in  Am.  Statistical  Asso.  Quarterly  Publications,  new  series,  XV,  813-839. 

5  The  task  of  selecting  communities  which  were  urban  presents  marked  difficulties. 

(See  U.  S.  Census  of  1880,  I,  Population,  p.  xxviii,  and  Census  of  1910,  I,  Popula¬ 
tion,  p.  53.)  The  8,000  limit  is  conservative  for  there  were  in  1840  many  industrial 
communities  in  New  England  of  between  5,000  and  8,000  inhabitants. 


FOREIGN  TRADE  AND  HOME  MARKET 


201 


With  new  markets  growing  up  at  the  farmer’s  front  door,  agriculture  went 
forward,  and  now  the  progress  was  democratic  and  widespread.  The  economic 
force  of  the  market  worked  on  dirt  farmers  ”  as  well  as  on  gentlemen  far¬ 
mers.  With  the  new  iron  plows,  harrows,  and  cultivators  came  better  tillage; 
with  the  horse  rakes  larger  hay  crops  were  harvested.  The  hay  was  better,  for 
clover  and  other  artificial  grasses  were  sown  more  generally.  Potatoes  and 
other  roots  were  for  the  first  time  grown  in  quantities  for  fodder.  Livestock 


[Bony0* 


Hand  I 


j*Lou/sville\^  Richmond**  ^^orfolk 

Petersburg 


mSt.Loutsj 


Charleston* 
Savannah  •> 


7obi/<&i 


o 


/  Providence  23,  /  7/ 
2  Lowell  20,796 
3.  Sa/em  /  5,082 
9.  New  Haven  /  2,923 

5.  NewBedford  /  2 ,087 

6.  Charlestown  //, 9 89 
7. Springfield  / 0,985 
8  Fishkill  10,937 

9.  Poughkeepsie  10,006 
9,968 
8,333 
9,539 
9,367 
9,089 
9,0/2 
8.959 
8,909 


10.  Hartford 
//  Newport 
\J2.  Smith  field 
13.  Lynn 
/9.  Roxburg 
IS  Nontuckei 
ft 6.  Alexandria 
/  7  Cambridge 


Fig.  13. — Urban  concentration,  1840. 


were  better  kept  and  more  attention  was  paid  to  the  breeding  of  sheep,  cattle, 
and  swine.  Barnyard  manures  were  more  carefully  preserved;  gypsum  and 
lime  were  more  widely  used.  By  1840  the  results  were  evident.  Buel 6 
observed  that  the  depleted  soils  in  some  of  the  older  districts  had  been  renewed 
by  intensive  cultivation.  He  wrote : 

“  The  counties  of  Dutchess,  Orange,  Columbia,  and  a  large  portion  of  Long  Island, 
m  our  own  state  [New  York]  and  many  districts  in  Massachusetts,  Pennsylvania,  &c! 
sufficiently  attest  this  fact.  In  these,  exhaustion  has  given  way  to  a  system  of  augmenta¬ 
tion  and  improvement.” 


6  The  Cultivator,  IV  (1837-38),  p.  93. 


202 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


IMPROVEMENTS  IN  NEW  ENGLAND. 


In  New  England  there  was  a  general  atmosphere  of  improvement.  Said 
the  speaker  at  the  Middlesex  County  (Massachusetts)  Fair  in  1847: 7 

«  Within  the  last  twenty  years  agriculture  has  made  great  advances  in  this  county . 
meadows  have  been  reclaimed ;  drains  have  been  opened ;  beautiful  orchards  have  been 
planted ;  tasteful  cottages,  improved  houses  and  barns,  have  been  constructed ;  the  races 
of  animals  have  been  improved;  the  sources  of  fertility  have  been  guarded,  land  more 
highly  cultivated;  and  the  society  I  have  the  honor  to  address  has,  no  doubt,  contributed 

to  the  progress  of  agriculture.” 


The  prosperity  of  farmers  was  reflected  in  a  greater  interest  in  civic  better¬ 
ment.  The  pastor  of  a  small  town  in  New  Hampshire  related  in  1837  the 
remarkable  changes  that  had  occurred  there.8 


“As  this  is  an  age  of  enterprise  and  improvement,  it  would  be  expected,  that  even 
in  the  history  of  a  small  town,  something  would  be  said  on  this  subject.  And  I  would 
say  that  whoever  recollects  the  aspects  of  the  roads,  the  fields  and  the  buildings,  as 
they  were  forty  years  ago,  and  looks  on  them  now,  and  considers  what  vast  labor  and 
cost  of  a  hale  and  enterprising  people  have  been  expended,  he  would  be  surprised 

at  the  change.  .  .  ,  .  n  , 

“  The  meeting-house  was  all  tattered  and  torn,  without  a  steeple,  without  a  bell,  and 

almost  without  a  covering ;  and  might  have  remained  so  for  an  age,  or  till  it  jotted 
down,  if  it  had  not  been  for  the  people  of  God,  who,  with  their  own  money  and  hands, 
by  divine  aid,  put  it  in  a  better  condition.  The  roads  were  full  of  stones,  or  in  some 
places  of  mire;  but  now  for  almost  six  miles,  ....  they  are  paved  underneath  with 
stone,  and  covered  with  gravel.  The  buildings,  which  were  mostly  old  and  shattered, 
are  now  repaired  or  displaced  for  new  ones,  and  many  new  and  handsome  houses  are 
reared  up  where  there  were  none  before.  The  fences,  reeling  and  decaying,  are  turned 
into  stone  wall,  of  which,  perhaps,  there  is  more  than  in  any  other  town  of  the  same 
size  in  the  state.  The  swamps,  which  were  full  of  useless  bushes  and  hammocks,  are 
now  levelled  and  replenished  with  luxuriant  grass.” 


MARKET  INFLUENCES  MORE  EFFECTIVE  THAN 

EDUCATIONAL  WORK. 

Partial  credit  for  the  progress  of  the  period  is  due  to  the  agencies  for  the  | 
diffusion  of  agricultural  knowledge,  the  annual  fairs  held  by  the  few  surviv¬ 
ing  or  reorganized  societies,  and  the  farm  papers,  but  market  influences  were  ^ 
by  far  more  important.  Wherever  a  paper  mill  or  a  woolen  mill,  a  chair  or 
cabinet  shop,  or  an  iron  foundry  was  established,  farmers  began  to  sell  raw  , 
materials,  straw,  wool,  lumber,  and  building  materials,  firewood  and  meat, 
grain,  dairy  products,  and  vegetables  for  the  mill-hands.  Leaders  of  agricul¬ 
tural  opinion  realized  the  significance  of  the  home  market.  After  enumerat¬ 
ing  the  measures  adopted  by  the  New  York  Board  of  Agriculture  to  increase 
production  by  the  diffusion  of  knowledge,  etc.,  a  contributor  to  its  Memoirs 

wrote : 9 

“  I  have  long  been  of  the  opinion,  that  the  most  powerful  inducements  which  could 
have  been  held  out,  has  been  omitted.  I  mean  that  of  providing  prompt  and  ready 
markets  for  these  productions . A  ready  demand  for  agricultural  productions,  at 

^  Address  of  E.  H.  Derby,  in  Abstract  from  the  Returns  of  Agric.  Socs.,  in  Mass., 

8  Rev.  John  Keily,  Sketch  of  Hampstead  ( New  Hampshire),  in  N.  H.  Hist.  Soc.  Col¬ 

lections,  V,  192. 

9  Tibbitts  in  vol.  Ill  (1826),  p.  289. 


FOREIGN  TRADE  AND  HOME  MARKET 


203 


remunerating  prices,  it  is  presumed,  is  the  only  adequate  inducement  which  can  be 
relied  upon,  for  insuring  a  careful  cultivation  of  the  land,  or  for  increasing  the  quantity 
of  its  produce.  It  appears  almost  certain,  that  no  bounties  or  encouragements,  which 
it  is  in  the  power  of  the  state,  or  of  societies  to  pay  directly  to  the  agriculturist,  can 
induce  him  to  make  much  improvement  in  his  modes  of  cultivation,  or  to  raise  any 
thing  beyond  the  immediate  demands  of  his  family;  while  any  surplus  which  he  may 
rmse,  beyond  that  amount,  shall  be  worth  nothing;  or  where  it  cannot  be  sold,  or  ex- 
c  anged *  upon  terms  of  comparative  equality  with  the  profits  of  the  capitals  and  labor 
employed  in  the  production  of  all  the  other  articles  required  for  his  support.” 


Concrete  instances  might  be  multiplied  of  the  direct  connection  between  the 
niar^et  an<d  better  farming.  Ihe  following  item-  from  the  Kennebec 
(Maine)  Journal 10  describes  the  relation  of  manufactures  to  agriculture  in 
Winthrop,  Maine: 


No  one  can  ride  through  the  town  of  Winthrop  without  observing  the  greater  beauty 
of  the  farms,  and  the  higher  state  of  cultivation,  than  prevails  generally  in  the  State 
This  has  been  in  a  great  measure  effected  by  the  Agricultural  Society  in  that  town  • 
but  m  connexion  with  this  there  is  another  cause  for  a  thrifty  agriculture,  viz.  a  cotton 
factory.  Do  not  smile,  reader ;  the  factories  of  the  Eastern  States  have  been  the  im- 
peUing  and  most  efficient  causes  of  agricultural  improvement  and  the  increased  value 
of  land.  They  have  furnished  the  ready  home  market  for  the  wool,  the  hides,  the  fuel 
timber  beef,  pork,  hay,  butter,  cheese,  apples,  cider,  potatoes,  and  a  great  many  other 
vegetables,  besides  eggs,  lamb,  veal,  and  many  other  things,  most  of  which  cannot  be 
exported  because  of  their  perishable  nature,  and  for  none  of  which  there  is  any  foreign 
market  to  be  depended  upon.  The  Agricultural  Societies,  agricultural  publications,  and 
the  experiments  and  study  of  scientific  farmers,  have  diffused  that  knowledge  of 

f7/SbfZduy  -WhlCh  ^aS,  enabled  the  farmers  to  supply,  from  the  same  land  they  before 
i  ed,  the  increased  demand  created  by  the  manufacturing  cities,  towns  and  villages.” 


DIFFERENTIATING  EFFECT  OF  THE  MARKET. 

Notwithstanding  the  optimistic  tone  of  the  above  quotations,  the  agricul¬ 
tural  millennium  had  not  arrived  in  the  East  in  1840.  There  was  still  much  bad 
farming,  pastures  covered  with  weeds,  barnyards  that  were  mud-holes,  cruelly 
neglected  stock,  and  scanty  harvests.  Such  farming  was  typical  of  the  eigh¬ 
teenth  century ;  in  unprogressive  regions  not  touched  with  market  influence 
it  was  perhaps  no  worse  than  it  had  been,  but  it  seemed  worse  by  contrast 
to  the  progress  made  elsewhere.  It  is  true  that  better  farming  was  not  evenly 

•  *11  1  c  1  ^  ^  t  was  spotty,”  and  the  spottiness  was  an 

inevitable  result  of  the  beginnings  of  commercial  agriculture.  As  long  as 
agriculture  was  self-sufficient  and  farm  production  was  only  for  farm  con¬ 
sumption,  the  superiority  of  one  piece  of  land  over  another,  and  of  one  farm 
manager  over  his  neighbor,  were  not  obvious.  But  as  soon  as  the  two  pieces 
of  land  and  their  managers  were  brought  into  business  competition  in  pro¬ 
ducing  for  sale,  then  the  differences  in  fertility  and  in  location  resulted  in 
differing  costs  of  production.  Thus  the  market  acted  as  a  selective  force. 
Under  its  influence  good  land  became  more  sharply  differentiated  from  poor 
land.  The  latter,  even  entire  farms,  was  abandoned  to  grow  up  to  woods  while 
the  farmers’  efforts  were  concentrated  on  the  better  soil.* 11 

10  Quoted  in  New  England  Farmer,  X  (1831-32),  p.  149. 

11  A  catalogue  of  farms  abandoned  in  Milford,  Massachusetts,  between  1750  and  1850 

is  given  in  Ballou,  Milford  (Mass.),  389  et  seq.  On  the  conversion  of  pasturage  to 
woodland  in  Plymouth  and  Norfolk  Counties  (Mass.),  see  4th  Report  Aoric  of 
M ass.,  389. 


Chapter  XVI. — Farm  Labor  and  Labor-Saving 

Machinery. 

The  contribution  to  agricultural  progress  which  we  think  of  as  character¬ 
istically  American  is  the  invention  and  development  of  labor-saving  machin¬ 
ery.  Scarcity  of  labor,  which  for  two  centuries  had  been  a  characteristic  of 
northern  farming,  was  rendered  even  more  acute  in  the  years  1810-1840  by 
the  growth  of  manufactures  and  by  the  competition  of  factories  for  the  man¬ 
power  of  the  community. 

The  importance  of  agricultural  machinery  to  the  Eastern  farmer  (and  it 
was  in  the  East  that  the  new  inventions  were  mostly  used  before  1840)  can 
be  appreciated  only  when  we  realize  that  the  industrial  communities  were  at 
the  same  time  demanding  from  the  farmer  increased  production  and  depriving 
him  of  an  essential  factor  of  production.  Almost  all  farms  east  of  the 
Alleghenies  were  probably  on  the  stage  of  diminishing  returns  by  1840. 
Many  of  them  had  been  in  that  condition  for  over  a  century.  Unless  im¬ 
provements  were  made  in  the  methods  of  farming,  increased  output  could 
be  obtained  only  at  higher  costs. 

Farm  wages  were  rising,  and  unless  some  way  were  found  to  make  farm 
labor  more  effective  it  seemed  that  at  the  very  outset  eastern  farmers  would  be 
baffled  in  their  attempts  to  take  advantage  of  market  opportunities  and  to 
develop  commercial  agriculture.  Had  the  new  farm  tools  and  machines  not 
appeared  manufactures  would  have  been  checked  by  rising  labor  costs,  result¬ 
ing  from  an  increased  cost  of  living,  and  consequently  the  home  market  itself 

would  have  developed  less  vigorously. 

The  invention,  therefore,  in  this  period,  of  a  number  of  important  machines 
such  as  the  horse  rake,  the  cultivator,  the  thresher,  and  the  reaper,  by  which 
eventually  horse  power  was  to  a  large  extent  substituted  for  man  power  on 
the  farm,  and  the  improvement  of  ploughs  and  hand  tools,  making  both  horse 
labor  and  man  labor  more  effective,  were  full  of  significance  for  the  progress 
of  the  whole  community  and  not  alone  of  the  farm  people. 

TREND  CITYWARD  AGGRAVATES  FARM-LABOR  PROBLEM. 

There  never  had  existed  in  the  North  a  class  of  landless  men  who  could  be 
relied  upon  as  agricultural  laborers,  and  consequently  farm  work  in  that 
section  was  normally  performed  by  members  of  the  farm  family.  Orphans 
and  the  children  of  the  poorer  farmers  who  were  “  bound  out  ”  were  prac¬ 
tically  the  only  other  labor  force.  With  the  growth  of  the  factory  villages 
and  towns  the  farmers’  sons  and  daughters  were  drawn  away  from  agricul¬ 
tural  pursuits.  The  boys  who  were  dissatisfied  but  who  wanted  to  continue 
farming  still  went  west,  as  the  boys  of  earlier  generations  had  done.  But  for 
a  time  after  1820  the  competition  of  the  cities  seems  to  have  largely  checked 


204 


FARM  LABOR  AND  LABOR-SAVING  MACHINERY 


205 


western  migration.1  The  younger  generation  had  the  idea  that  farming  was 
bound  to  be  unprofitable  and,  besides,  were  oppressed  with  a  growing  sense 
of  social  inferiority  to  city  folks.  Speakers  at  cattle  shows  felt  called  upon 
to  protest  against  the  prevalent  low  estimation  of  agriculture  as  a  “  menial 
employment.  Wrote  a  contributor  to  the  New  England  F  anner ;  3 

Every  farmer  s  son  and  daughter  are  in  pursuit  of  some  genteel  mode  of  living. 
After  consuming  the  farm  in  the  expenses  of  a  fashionable,  flashy,  fanciful  education, 
they  leave  the  honorable  profession  of  their  fathers  to  become  doctors,  lawyers,  mer¬ 
chants,  or  ministers  or  something  of  the  kind . ” 

Jesse  Buel,  writing  in  the  Cultivator,  described  the  same  situation  in  New 
York.4 

‘  Thousands  of  young  men  do  annually  forsake  the  plough,  and  the  honest  profession 
of  their  fathers,  if  not  to  win  the  fair,  at  least  from  an  opinion,  too  often  confirmed  by 
mistaken  parents,  that  agriculture  is  not  the  road  to  wealth,  to  honor,  nor  to  happiness. 
And  such  will  continue  to  be  the  case,  until  our  agriculturists  become  qualified  to  asssume 
that  rank  in  society  to  which  the  importance  of  their  calling,  and  their  numbers,  entitle 
them,  and  which  intelligence  and  self-respect  can  alone  give  them.” 

Immigration  afforded  the  farmer  little  help  in  the  solution  of  his  labor 
problem.  The  Irish  and  English  laborers,  who  were  arriving  by  the  thousands 
every  year  in  eastern  ports,  showed  but  slight  aptitude  for  the  varied  tasks 

of  American  agriculture.  A  farmer  from  St.  Lawrence  County,  New  York 
wrote : 5 

“We  have,  for  a  year  or  two  past,  had  the  offer  of  labour  from  British  and  Irish 
emigrants,  but  with  general  pretensions  to  a  knowledge  of  farming,  few  of  them  can 
earn  their  board  at  the  kind  of  labour  required  among  us.  The  system  of  division  of 
a  our,  so  beneficial  in  the  arts,  manufactories,  and  some  of  the  agricultural  employ¬ 
ments,  of  a  country  overstocked  with  hands,  renders  the  labourers  accustomed  to  it,  of 
little  use,  among  a  people  differently  situated,  who  have  been  obliged  from  childhood 
to  practice  twenty  different  employments,  with  equal  dexterity.” 


FARM  WAGES,  IN  CHESTER  COUNTY,  PENNSYLVANIA. 


In  the  absence  of  more  general  data,  the  scale  of  farm  wages  in  Chester 
County,  Pennsylvania,  in  1828  6  may  be  taken  as  typical  of  the  general  wage 
level  in  progressive  communities  of  the  East.  By  the  year,  agricultural  labor¬ 
ers  received  $80  to  $100  with  board  and  lodging  or  $8  per  month  in  summer 
and  $5  in  winter.  By  the  day,  the  laborer  received  40  cents  with  board,  or 
if  he  found  himself,  62^  cents.  For  harvest  hands,  piece-work  rates  were 
as  follows  ^reaping  wheat,  $1.75  to  $2  per  acre;  for  mowing  “  an  acre  of 
stout  grass,”  about  $1 ;  for  mowing  barley  or  oats,  about  50  cents.  When 
paid  by  the  day,  harvest  hands  received  from  62 J  to  75  cents  with  food.  Al¬ 
though  these  wages  seem  small  according  to  modern  standards,  the  labor 
cost  of  farm  operations  was  nevertheless  high.  A  good  workman  could  reap 
about  a  half -acre  of  wheat  in  a  day,  making  the  cost  of  harvesting  that 


1  Worcester  Magazine,  I  (1825-26),  p.  hi;  II  (1826),  p.  35;  N.  E.  Fanner,  IV  (1825- 

26),  p.  186. 

2  Address  of  Peter  Eaton,  before  Essex  County  (Massachusetts),  Agricultural  Society 

3  ywtt82/21’  S'  5*  xSee  als5)  N'  E‘  Farmer>  VIII  (1829-30),  p.  26;  XVIII  (1839-40),  p.  206. 
•XVI1  (1838-39),  P.  406. 

IV  (1837-38),  p.  190. 

In  N.  Y.  Bd.  Agric.  Memoirs,  II  (1823),  p.  87. 

8  Letter  of  IVm.  Darlington  in  American  Farmer,  X  (1828),  p.  73. 


206 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


crop  87^  cents  to  $1  per  acre.  Mowing  barley  and  oats  at  3  acres  a  day,  the 
usual  rate,  cost  the  farmer  16J  cents  per  acre.  For  threshing,  the  price  was 
usually  J2i  cents  per  bushel  for  wheat,  7  cents  for  barley,  and  about  5  cents 
for  oats,  the  laborer  finding  his  own  food.  The  usual  daily  output  of  the 
laborer  at  this  work  was  8  bushels  of  wheat  or  15  bushels  of  barley  or  20 

bushels  of  oats. 


TREND  OF  FARM  WAGES  IN  MASSACHUSETTS. 

Data  for  agricultural  wages  in  this  period  for  Massachusetts  7  show  an 
unmistakable  upward  tendency.  (See  fig.  14.)  The  data  on  which  the 
curves  are  based  will  be  found  in  table  69,  p.  495- 


Fig.  14.— Wages  of  farm  labor  and  prices  of  farm  products,  1801-1836. 


Summarizing  by  decades,  the  average  annual  wages  paid  by  the  day  without 
board  were  :  1791  to  1800,  $0,478  ;  1801  to  1810,  $0,779  ;  181 1  to  1820,  $0.782 ; 
1821  to  1830,  $0,803;  1831  to  1840,  $0,875. 


Table  30. — Farm  wages  and  farm  prices. 


Annual  average  for 
•  the  years — 

Corn, 

bus. 

Beef, 

bbl. 

Pork, 

bbl. 

Rye, 

bus. 

Farm 

wages 

per 

day. 

1801  180^  . 

$0,920 

.666 

-m 

•— 1 

00  M 

61  CO 

0  0 

$18.40 

12.30 

$0,990 

•734 

$0,696 

765 

1826—18^0  . 

The  rising  cost  of  labor  was  much  more  serious  for  the  farmer  than  these 
figures  of  money  wages  indicate,  for  while  wages  were  rising  the  prices  of 
farm  products  were  falling.  The  contrasting  tendencies  in  wages  in  prices 
over  a  period  of  25  years  are  shown  in  table  30.8 

7  prom  Wright,  Wages  and  Prices:  1752-1860.  In  Massachusetts  Bureau  of  Statistics 

of  Labor ,  16th  Annual  Report  (1885),  parts  III  and  IV,  p.  434- 

8  The  wages  are  from  Wright,  in  16th  Annual  Report,  Massachusetts  Bureau  of  Statis¬ 

tics  of  Labor,  parts  III  and  IV,  434-  In  the  absence  of  data  for  1829  and  1830  the 
figures  for  1825  and  1831  have  been  substituted.  The  prices  are  from  Hayward, 
Gazetteer  of  Massachusetts  (Rev.  ed.,  1849),  PP-  392_395- 


FARM  LABOR  AND  LABOR-SAVING  MACHINERY  207 

The  quantities  of  produce  necessary  to  purchase  30  days’  farm  labor  at  the 
prices  and  wages  given  above  are  shown  in  table  31. 


Table  31.— Quantities  of  produce  necessary  to  purchase  30  days 

of  farm  labor  in  Massachusetts. 

[Source:  See  Table  30.] 


Years. 

Corn, 

bus. 

I  Beef, 

[  bbls. 

Pork, 

bus. 

Rye, 

bbls. 

1801-1805  . 

27.70 

3446 

1.77 

2.77 

II3 

I.87 

21.09 

31.27 

1826-1830  . 

AGRICULTURAL  TOOLS. 

In  hand  tools  important  changes  were  effected.  The  clumsy  wooden  or 
iron-shod  shovels,  hoes,  and  forks  were  replaced  by  lighter  and  better  designed 
implements  with  blades  or  tines  of  cast  steel.  The  grain  cradle  came  into 


general  use,  displacing  the  sickle.  A  new  cradle,  lighter  and  more  effective, 
was  designed,  which  was  known  as  Vaughan’s  cradle,  after  the  inventor, 
Charles  Vaughan,  of  Hallowell,  Maine.  It  was  called  also  the  Scotch  bow  or 
Scotch  cradle.9  A  contributor  to  the  Maine  Farmer  wrote  : 10 

It  is  much  lighter,  more  easily  made  and  kept  in  repare,  than  the  common  clumsy 
cradle>  which  is  burdensome  for  a  man  to  bear  on  his  shoulder,  and  which  to  swing 


9  A  cut  and  description  are  given  in  Maine  Farmer,  V  (1837),  p.  178. 

10  ibid.,  251. 


208 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


all  day,  requires  great  strength  and  effort.  To  reap  half  an  acre  of  grain,  is  considered 
a  fair  day’s  work;  and  to  do  this  well,  a  man  must  have  had  some  experience  in  the 
business  To  use  the  old-fashioned  cradle,  requires  so  much  dexterity,  that,  with  us, 
it  is  almost  a  trade  by  itself ;  and  a  cradler  demands  and  receives  two  or  three  times 
as  much  pay  as  a  common  laborer.-With  the  improved  cradle,  after  a  little  use,  a  good 
mower  will  be  able  to  reap  as  much  ground  in  a  day,  as  he  could  mow,  and  to  leave  the 
grain  in  good  order  to  bind  up.  It  is  no  inconsiderable  advantage  to  cut  the  straw 

close  to  the  ground.” 


AGRICULTURAL  MACHINERY.— IMPROVEMENTS  IN 

THE  PLOW. 

Plows,  harrows,  and  two-wheeled  carts  were  the  only  kinds  of  farm  equip¬ 
ment  to  which  animal  power  had  been  applied  at  the  beginning  of  the  nine¬ 
teenth  century.  The  more  effective  design  of  plows  and  harrows  and  the 
substitution  of  the  horse-drawn,  four-wheeled  wagon  for  the  ox-cart  consti¬ 
tuted  a  great  step  forward  in  agricultural  progress.  Of  equal  if  not  greater 
importance  was  the  extension  of  the  application  of  horse  power  to  other  farm 
tasks,  corn-planting  and  cultivating,  hay-raking,  reaping,  and  threshing.  The 


development  of  a  better  plow  took  two  directions ;  ( i )  the  improvement  in  its 
design  or  form,  and  (2)  the  substitution  of  iron  at  first  and  later  steel  for 
wood  in  the  moldboard,  share,  and  landside.  To  Thomas  Jefferson  belongs 
the  credit  of  having  first  in  America  designed  a  moldboard  on  true  mathe¬ 
matical  principles.11  Although  Jefferson’s  plow  did  not  prove  a  practical 
success,  yet  by  his  researches  he  demonstrated  that  plows  could  be  made  by 
rule  and  set  forth  one  of  the  many  rules  that  are  applicable  to  their  construc¬ 
tion.  To  Jefferson,  therefore,  belongs  the  credit  for  taking  the  first  step  in 
removing  plow-making  from  the  domain  of  empiricism.  Each  plow  need  no 
longer  be  an  individual  product  whose  design  was  determined  by  the  fancy 
or  skill  of  its  maker.  It  was  now  possible  for  moldboards  to  be  produced  by 
many  plowrights  on  a  common  model. 

In  1797,  Charles  Newbold,  of  Burlington,  New  Jersey,  obtained  a  patent 
for  a  cast-iron  plow,  having  the  moldboard,  share,  and  landside  all  in  one 
casting.  Before  his  time  moldboards  had  been  of  wood,  protected  by  iron 
plates,  and  some  of  these  plows  had  been  equipped  with  cast-iron  shares.1- 
Newbold  had  no  success  in  persuading  farmers  to  adopt  his  invention,  al¬ 
ii  Jefferson  described  his  moldboard  in  a  letter  of  March  23,  1798,  to  Sir  John  Sinclair, 
printed  in  Am.  Philosophical  Soc.  Transactions ,  IV  (i799),  PP- .313  et  seq. 

12  a  cast-iron  share  was  exhibited  before  the  N.  Y.  Society  for  Promotion  of  Useiu 
Arts  in  1794.  See  Transactions,  I  (2d  ed.,  1801),  p.  1 73- 


ail 


Fig.  16. — Cradling  and  binding 


wheat  in  the  old 


Fig.  17.— Cradling  wheat.  (Photograph  taken  in  Montgomery  County,  Indiana 

July  2,  1918.) 


FARM  LABOR  AND  LABOR-SAVING  MACHINERY 


209 


though  he  spent  large  sums  of  money  in  the  attempt.  They  are  said  to  have 
objected  that  the  iron  poisoned  the  soil  and  encouraged  the  growth  of  weeds. 
Undoubtedly  better  tillage  did  cause  weeds  as  well  as  crops  to  grow  faster, 
but  probably  a  more  important  cause  of  their  rejection  of  the  new  invention 
was  its  cost,  and  the  fact  that  when  the  share  was  dulled  or  broken  the  whole 
plow  must  be  replaced. 

Between  1800  and  1830  a  great  many  new  plows  were  presented  to  the 
farmers.  In  all,  124  patents  were  granted  in  this  period,  and,  in  addition,  a 
number  of  English  and  Scotch  models  were  imported  for  sale.  The  most 
important  of  the  patents  were  those  granted  in  1814  and  1819  to  Jethro 
Wood,  of  Scipio,  New  York.  He  improved  the  design  of  the  moldboard,  lessen¬ 
ing  its  resistance.  Like  other  inventors  of  his  day  he  did  not  regard  the 


pulverization  of  the  soil  as  an  essential  object  in  plowing.  It  was  not  until 
1839  that  a  patent  was  taken  out  by  Samuel  Witherow  and  David  Pierce 
which  was  designed  to  twist  and  bend  the  furrow-slice  so  as  to  leave  it  broken.13 
Wood’s  plow,  in  contrast  to  Newbold’s,  was  not  cast  in  one  piece,  but  was 
made  up  of  several  castings  joined  together  and  fastened  by  lugs  and  inter¬ 
locking  pieces.  “  It  was  the  first  plow  in  which  the  parts  most  exposed  to 
wear  could  be  renewed  in  the  field  by  the  substitution  of  cast  pieces.”  14  Wood’s 
invention,  therefore,  was  one  of  the  first  instances,  if  not  actually  the  first,  of 
the  application  in  the  manufacture  of  agricultural  machinery  of  the  principle 
of  standardization  and  interchangeability  of  parts.15  (See  fig.  19.)  The 

13  Roberts,  Fertility  of  the  Land  (189 7  ed.),  p.  49.  Chapter  II  of  this  work  contains  an 

excellent  discussion  of  the  improvement  of  the  plow  from  the  earliest  times. 

14  Gilbert,  Jethro  Wood ,  67. 

15  A  detailed  description  of  Wood’s  plow  is  found  in  Ploughboy,  II  (1820-21),  p.  123. 

Wood’s  specifications  for  the  construction  of  his  improved  plow  of  1819  are  given  in 
N.  Y.  State  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions,  XXVII  (1867),  pt.  I,  pp.  465-468. 

IS 


210 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


process  of  cold  chilling  the  landside  and  lower  edge  of  the  share,  invented  by 
Edwin  A.  Stevens  of  New  Jersey  in  1817,  added  greatly  to  the  wear  of  these 
parts.16  A  number  of  ploughs  with  a  reversible  or  revolving  moldboard  and 
share  were  invented  and  came  into  use.  Their  principal  use  was  in  plowing 
across  hillsides  where  it  was  desirable  always  to  throw  the  furrow  down  the 
slope.  The  upper  and  lower  sides  of  the  share  and  moldboard  were  made  iden¬ 
tical,  so  that  either  might  form  the  sole.  The  moldboard  was  pivoted  so  that  it 
might  be  thrown  around  from  right  to  left  or  left  to  right.17 

Newbold’s  plow,  as  we  have  seen,  was  rejected  by  the  farmers.  Until  about 
1820  they  went  ahead  with  their  old-fashioned,  clumsy  “  bull  plows,”  and 
then,  suddenly,  in  a  single  decade  they  abandoned  their  wooden  plows  and 
adopted  those  of  cast  iron.  A  committee  of  the  Massachusetts  Society  for 
Promoting  Agriculture  reported  in  1830  that  at  their  first  plowing-match  held 
in  1817  “not  one  cast-iron  moldboard  plough  was  in  our  vicinity,  if  in  the 
State.”  At  the  1830  event  all  the  plows  which  entered  were  of  cast-iron.18 

In  Ohio  the  new  plows  were  introduced  about  the  year  1825,  and  by  1840 
had  displaced  the  old-style  timber  plows.19  In  the  west  it  was  found  that  the 
cast-iron  plows  would  not  scour  well,  and  this  difficulty  led  to  the  invention 
about  1835  of  the  steel  moldboard,  which  took  a  high  polish  and  so  did  not 
clog  in  sticky  soils. 

SAVING  OF  LABOR  EFFECTED  BY  NEW  PLOWS. 

The  saving  effected  by  the  new  plows  in  the  labor  of  both  men  and  draft 
animals  was  remarkable.  At  the  plowing-matches  held  in  connection  with 
cattle  shows  by  the  agricultural  societies,  double  teams  of  oxen  with  a  man 
to  drive  and  another  to  hold  were  at  first  used,  but  by  1830  a  single  plowman 
and  one  yoke  of  oxen  was  the  standard  outfit.20  Wrote  a  contributor  to 
The  Ploughboy : 21 

“  With  the  old  ill-shaped  ploughs,  with  wooden  soles  and  mould  boards,  the  strength  of 
three  horses  were  requisite  for  breaking  up  a  piece  of  sward  land.  With  the  best  con¬ 
structed  ploughs,  now  getting  into  use,  more  particularly  those  of  Wood’s  and  Burden’s, 
two  horses  can  easily  perform  the  same  labour;  of  course,  with  the  use  of  such  newly 
constructed  ploughs,  the  farmer  need  keep  but  two  horses,  while  with  the  old  sort 
of  plough  he  has  to  keep  three.  Here  then  is  a  saving  of  about  $35  a  year,  for  such,  at 
least,  will  be  found  the  yearly  expense  in  keeping  a  common  working  horse.” 

HARROWS  AND  CULTIVATORS. 

The  old  triangular  or  “A”  harrow  was  still  used  on  fields  obstructed  with 
stumps  and  rocks,  but  on  clear  land  a  new  invention,  the  two-horse  hinged 
harrow,  proved  more  economical.  (See  fig.  20.) 

The  cultivator,  introduced  about  1820,  had  largely  supplanted  by  1840  the 
plow  and  the  hand-hoe  on  eastern  farms  in  working  between  the  rows  of 

16  N.  Y.  State  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions,  XXVII  (1867),  pt.  I,  p.  470. 

17  Ohio  State  Bd.  Agric.  14th  Annual  Report  (1859),  p.  529.  An  illustration  and  de¬ 

scription  of  one  of  these  plows  is  given  in  N.  Y .  Farmer,  VII  (1834),  p.  77. 

18  Massachusetts  Agricultural  Repository,  X,  233.  See  also  Futhey  and  Cope,  Chester 

County,  Pennsylvania,  337,  340;  Chase,  History  of  Old  Chester,  New  Hampshire,  427. 

19  Burkett,  Agric.  of  Ohio,  155. 

20  N ew  England  Farmer,  IX  (1830-31),  107;  XVII  (1838-39),  114. 

21 II  (1820-21),  p.  331. 


FARM  LABOR  AND  LABOR-SAVING  MACHINERY 


Fig.  21. — The  cultivator. 


212 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


corn.  The  new  machines  were  cheap,  costing  only  $15  or  $20,  and  although 
clumsy  and  heavy  according  to  modern  standards  they  were  much  lighter 
than  plows,  and,  by  doing  away  with  hoeing,  saved  much  hand  labor.  It  was 
estimated,  in  1826,  that  more  corn  could  be  tilled  in  a  given  time  with  one 
cultivator  than  with  three  plows.22  Two  types  of  cultivators  are  shown  in  fig¬ 
ures  21  and  22.  The  expanding  cultivator,  a  later  model,  has  a  device  for 
adapting  it  to  crops  planted  at  varying  distances  between  rows.  Note  the 
short  necks  of  the  teeth  on  both  models. 

HARVESTING  MACHINERY. 

The  farm-labor  problem  has  always  been  most  acute  at  harvest  time.  With 
the  development  of  markets  for  grain  and  hay,  it  became  obvious  that  the 
possibilities  of  profitable  production  were  limited  by  scarce  and  dear  labor 
at  this  critical  period.  Consequently  the  problem  of  the  application  of  animal 


Fig.  23. — Bailey’s  mowing  machine,  1823. 


power  to  the  slow  and  exhausting  tasks  of  mowing,  reaping,  and  threshing 
claimed  much  attention  from  inventors. 

The  substitution  of  the  cradle  for  the  sickle  in  reaping  wheat  and  other 
small  grains  had  been  a  notable  accomplishment.  But  the  cradle  was  still  a 
hand  tool.  The  invention  of  American  horse-power  mowing  and  reaping  ma¬ 
chines  dates  from  patents  issued  as  early  as  1803,  but  not  until  a  generation 
had  passed  were  any  effective  devices  introduced,  and  before  1840  their  use 
was  so  limited  as  to  have  no  effect  on  harvesting  costs  or  crop  acreage.  A 
tew  mowing-machines  were  in  use  on  river  flats  in  Herkimer  County,  New 
York,  about  1840.  In  New  England  they  were  not  in  use  until  after  1850.23 
Among  the  numerous  impracticable  machines  which  were  put  forward  by  their 
enthusiastic  designers,  one  of  the  most  interesting  was  that  patented  by 
Jeremiah  Bailey,  of  Chester  County,  Pennsylvania,  in  1822.  (See  fig.  23.) 
The  cutting  mechanism  was  a  circular  disk  5i  feet  in  diameter  (in  later 


22  American  Farmer,  Y III  (1826),  p.  55. 

23  See  N.  Y.  State  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions,  I  (1841),  p.  138;  Mass.  Bd.  Agric.  Annual 

Report  1856,  part  I,  p.  175;  Maine  Bd.  Agric.  18th  Annual  Report  (1873),  pt.  I, 

P.  370. 


FARM  LABOR  AND  LABOR-SAVING  MACHINERY 


213 


models  /  feet),  on  the  circumference  of  which  a  knife-edge  was  attached  in 
sections.  The  machine  was  mounted  on  two  wheels  and  drawn  by  a  horse 
walking  m  shafts  ahead  on  the  left  side.  By  gearing  to  one  of  the  wheels  the 
disk  was  made  to  revolve  in  a  horizontal  plane  “  with  great  velocity.”  24 
Meanwhile,  in  England  the  fundamental  features  of  the  modern  reaper  had 
been  devised  the  side-draft,  the  receiving-platform,  and  the  reciprocating 
cutter-bar.  In  1833  and  1834  two  Americans,  Obed  Hussey  and  Cyrus  Mc¬ 
Cormick,  obtained  patents  on  reaping  machines  which  were  destined  to  be  of 
great  significance  in  the  later  development  of  our  agriculture.  In  this  period 
the  new  reapers  had  hardly  come  into  use,  and  consequently  discussion  of 
them  is  deferred  to  a  later  chapter.25 

HORSE  RAKES. 

The  hay  crop  became  of  steadily  increasing  importance  in  the  East,  and 
although  farmers  must  still  be  content  to  mow  by  hand,  a  machine  for  raking 


Fig.  24. — The  horse  rake. 


by  horse  power  gave  them  great  assistance.  (See  fig.  24.)  As  originally  con¬ 
structed,  it  was  simply  a  big  comb  10  feet  wide,  with  15  or  18  teeth  20  inches 
long,  which  was  dragged  along  the  ground  by  a  horse  attached  to  the  frame 
by  ropes.  Handles  served  to  guide  the  rake,  to  lift  the  teeth  over  rocks  or 
stumps,  and  to  empty  the  accumulated  hay.  Such  rakes  were  in  use  on  Long 
Island  as  early  as  1812,  and  in  Massachusetts  and  Pennsylvania  in  1820.  The 
so-called  revolving  horse-rake  had  teeth  on  both  sides  of  the  scantling  which 
formed  the  head.  The  latter  was  pivoted  so  that  the  rake  might  be  emptied 
without  stopping  the  horse.  (See  fig.  25.)  None  of  the  rakes  in  use  before 
1840  was  mounted  on  wheels.26 


24  American  Farmer ,  V  (1823),  p.  199.  A  similar  machine  (Wilson’s)  propelled  from 

the  rear  is  described  in  Maine  Farmer ,  V  (1837),  p.  238,  and  in  The  Cultivator  III 
(1836-37),  P.  128. 

25  See  Chap.  XXIII,  pp.  287  et  seq. 

26  Descriptions  of  horse  rakes  are  given  in  Philadelphia  Agric.  Soc.  Memoirs,  III  (1814) 

P-  212;  Ploughboy,  II  (1820-21),  p.  310;  New  England  Farmer,  III  (1824-25),’ 
p.  361;  XII  (1833-34),  p.  393. 


214 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


The  saving  in  labor  accomplished  by  these  simple  devices  was  remarkable. 
A  writer  to  the  Pittsfield  (Massachusetts)  Sun 27  claimed  for  the  home¬ 
made  rake  which  he  described  : 

“  Jt  will  enable  one  man,  with  a  steady  horse  and  boy,  to  perform  at  least  as  much 
work  in  gathering  hay  into  winrow  and  pile  as  six  good  men  can  accomplish,  and  as 
clean  as  is  commonly  done  in  raking  by  hand.” 

In  the  American  Farmer  for  1825  "8  we  read: 

“  The  horse  hay-rake  is  in  very  general  use  in  most  of  the  eastern  counties  of  Penn¬ 
sylvania  and  in  New  Jersey,  with  which  they  can  rake  as  much  hay,  and  glean  the  grain 


Fig.  25. — Revolving  hay  rake. 


stubbles  as  fast  as  seven  men  can  do  with  the  hand  rake — which  is  a  saving  in  both 
time  and  crop . ” 

A  New  York  farmer,  after  6  or  7  years  of  experience,  estimated  that  one 
man  and  a  horse  rake  could  equal  the  work  of  10  men  with  hand  rakes.29  The 
farmers  of  Massachusetts  were  slower  in  adopting  the  horse  rakes  than  those 
in  Pennsylvania  and  New  Jersey.  William  Buckminster  30  doubted  whether 
one  farmer  in  a  thousand  in  his  State  had  ever  seen  one. 

“  As  a  wagon  load  of  them  was  passing,  last  summer,  to  Boston,  many  inquired  what 
those  sharp  wooden-tined  things  were  made  for,  and  whether  they  were  not  to  dig 

potatoes  with.”  _ _ _ _ 

27  Quoted  in  N.  Y.  Bd.  Agric.  Memoirs,  II  (1823),  p.  378. 

28  VII,  163. 

29  Cultivator,  VI  (1839-40),  P-  121. 

30  In  New  England  Farmer,  XVII  (1838-39),  p.  114* 


FARM  LABOR  AND  LABOR-SAVING  MACHINERY 


215 


THRESHING  MACHINES. 

Threshing  machines  utilizing  hand-power  were  introduced  from  Europe 
at  the  end  of  the  eighteenth  century  and  several  of  Scotch  make  were  set  up 
in  1802  in  Pennsylvania,  Delaware,  and  New  Jersey.  But  since  “  they  required 
more  care  than  common  labourers  would  bestow  in  feeding  the  machine  to  pre¬ 
vent  its  choking;  and  as  common  workmen  could  not  repair  it  when  out  of 

order,  and  the  maker  was  at  a  distance,  they  did  not  multiply . ” 31 

Small  hand-power  and  horse-power  machines  of  a  number  of  makes  were 
advertised  in  the  agricultural  press  in  the  years  1820  to  1830.  The  most 
successful  and  widely  used  seems  to  have  been  Pope’s  thresher.  It  utilized  an 


endless  belt  to  carry  the  grain  under  a  revolving  beater  whose  blows  dislodged 
the  wheat  from  the  straw. 

The  best  machine  on  the  market  before  1840  was  Pitt’s  thresher,  a  cylinder 
and  concave  machine,  invented  by  Hiram  and  John  Pitt,  of  Winthrop,  Maine, 
in  1836.  (See  fig.  51.)  It  was  unique  in  combining  the  functions  of  thresher 
and  separator.  In  The  Cultivator 32  it  was  described  as  follows: 

“  It  is  a  thrashing  machine  and  fanning-mill  combined.  It  thrashes,  separates  the 
straw  from  the  grain,  and  cleans  and  delivers  the  latter,  in  the  best  order,  for  the 
sacks  or  bags — in  one  operation.  It  may  be  constructed  for  the  power  of  one  horse  or 
more,  though  usually  adapted  for  two  horses,  attached  to  an  endless  chain  power, 
though  it  may  be  attached  to  other  horse  or  propelling  power;  and  the  whole  is  so 

31  Appendix  to  Address  by  James  Mease,  M.  D.,  in  Philadelphia  Agric.  Soc.  Memoirs, 
IV,  p.  xxxiv  (1818). 

82  Vol.  V  (1838-39),  p.  138. 


216 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


portable,  that  it  may  readily  be  transported,  horse-power  and  all,  by  a  two-horse  team, 
and  put  in  operation  on  a  twelve  foot  barn  floor.  The  cylinder  and  bed  are  of  cast 
iron,  the  former  rendered  doubly  secure  by  strong  iron  bands.  The  teeth  are  wrought 
iron,  secured  by  nuts,  are  not  liable  to  do  injury  if  broken,  and  are  readily  re- 

“  There  are  two  prominent  advantages  in  this  machine,  over  others  that  we  have  seen 

in  operation,  viz.  .  . 

“  i.  It  thrashes,  separates  the  straw,  and  perfectly  cleans  the  grain,  at  one  operation, 

demanding  only  the  additional  labor  of  a  man  to  bag  the  grain  as  it  comes  from  the 

machine.  And,  .  . 

“  2.  It  may  be  used  any  where — under  cover  during  rain,  or  in  the  open  held  during 

fair  weather,  as  there  is  no  scattering  or  loss  of  grain  even  in  the  field.  This  we  consider 
an  important  advantage  in  the  great  grain-growing  districts  of  the  south  and  west.”  33 

The  machine  with  the  horse-power  cost  $200  and  had  a  capacity  of  100 
bushels  of  wheat  per  day.  Other  smaller  machines  ranged  in  price  from 
$75  to  $150. 

In  regions  where  wheat  was  an  important  crop,  as  for  example  in  eastern 
Ohio  and  western  New  York,  threshers  were  in  general  use  by  1840  and 
in  some  counties  little  grain  was  threshed  in  any  other  way.  A  great  saving 
of  labor  was  effected  by  the  application  of  animal  power  to  threshing.  A 
contributor  to  the  Nezu  York  Farmer  34  in  1829,  wrote: 

“  One  of  the  most  slow,  laborious,  expensive  and  wasteful  operations  performed  on 
a  farm  is  that  of  threshing  grain  by  the  flail.  If  the  laborers  are  hired  by  the  day,  week, 
or  month,  they  will  not  generally,  if  they  do  the  work  well,  average  more  than  five  or 
six  bushels  per  day.  If  they  are  allowed  one  tenth,  they  will,  indeed,  often  thresh  out 
ten  bushels ;  but  the  attendance  and  inspection  of  the  owner  is  necessary  to  check  the 
preponderating  influence  of  self  interest  in  slighting  the  work . ” 

With  horses  one  or  two  men  and  a  boy  could  tramp  out  and  v/innow  from 
20  to  40  bushels  in  a  day.35 

In  addition  to  the  saving  of  labor,  the  threshing-machines  did  their  work 
more  effectively,  saving  much  grain  that  would  have  been  lost  by  other 
methods.  They  worked  more  quickly,  enabling  the  farmer  to  sell  his  grain 
in  the  fall  if  the  market  was  favorable. 

38  See  also  Maine  Farmer,  IV  (1836),  p.  178;  V  (1837),  pp.  73,  138. 

84  II,  (1829),  p.  161. 

35  Burkett,  Agriculture  of  Ohio,  161 ;  Conner,  Indiana  Agriculture,  8. 


Chapter  XVII. — Livestock — Improvement  and 

Specialization. 

COMMERCIAL  WOOL  GROWING. 

The  development  of  wool-growing  on  a  commercial  basis  was  a  spectacular 
incident  of  eastern  agriculture  in  this  period,  directly  resulting  from  the 
growth  of  a  home  market.  Wool-growing  for  home  consumption  was  a  stand¬ 
ard  feature  of  seventeenth  and  eighteenth  century  agriculture,  and  coarse  wool 
sheep  of  a  hardy  but  rather  unproductive  type  were  kept  on  every  farm.  The 
inhabitants  of  the  commercial  towns  bought  their  woolen  goods  from  Eng¬ 
land  at  prices  which  prevented  the  establishment  of  American  factories.  In 
1807  there  began  a  period  of  9  years  when  foreign  trade  was  seriously  inter¬ 
rupted,  first  by  the  embargo  and  non-intercourse  acts  and  then  by  the  War  of 
1812.  The  import  of  foreign  woolens  was  largely  cut  off,  and  prices  rose 
rapidly.  Under  such  conditions  woolen  mills  sprang  up  in  the  Eastern  States 
almost  overnight.  At  first  their  demand  was  for  the  finer  grades,  and  the 
Merino  craze  resulted.  With  the  outbreak  of  the  War  of  1812,  however,  the 
coarser  wools  were  largely  used  for  army  supplies.  Wool  production  in  gen¬ 
eral  was  stimulated,  bringing  the  farmers  more  widely  under  market  influences. 

INTRODUCTION  OF  MERINO  SHEEP. 

Between  1800  and  1815,  a  noteworthy  effort  was  made  to  improve  the 
native  stock  by  the  importation  of  rams  and  ewes  from  Spain.  The  Spanish 
Merino  sheep  had  long  been  famous  for  the  weight  and  excellent  quality  of 
their  wool,  but  on  account  of  rigid  exportation  restrictions  it  had  been  prac¬ 
tically  impossible  to  bring  representatives  of  the  stock  to  this  country.  These 
restrictions  were  broken  down  about  the  year  1800,  during  the  disorganization 
of  the  government  of  Spain  following  the  Napoleonic  invasion.  Advantage 
of  this  state  of  affairs  was  taken  by  our  ambassadors  in  Spain  and  France, 
Colonel  David  Humphreys  and  Robert  Livingston,  as  well  as  by  certain  other 
Americans  who  were  abroad  at  that  time.  They  secured  a  few  of  these  valu¬ 
able  animals,  which  they  shipped  back  to  America.  The  most  important  of 
the  early  importations  was  that  of  Colonel  Humphreys,  who  in  1802  brought 
to  his  home  in  Derby,  Connecticut,  a  flock  of  91  sheep — 21  rams  and  70 
ewes.  Robert  Livingston  also  sent  a  pair  from  France  to  his  home  in  New 
York  State. 

LIVINGSTON’S  DESCRIPTION. 

It  was  probably  with  these  animals  before  him  that  he  penned  the  following 
description  of  the  Merino  breed.1 

“  The  race  varies  greatly  in  size  and  beauty  in  different  parts  of  Spain.  It  is  commonly 
rather  smaller  than  the  middle-sized  sheep  of  America.  The  body  is  compact,  the  legs 


1  Livingston,  Essay  on  Sheep,  31. 


217 


218 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


short  the  head  long,  the  forehead  arched.  The  ram  generally  (but  not  invariably)  car¬ 
ries  very  large  spiral  horns,  has  a  fine  eye  and  a  bold  step.  Ihe  ewes  have  generally 
no  horns.  The  wool  of  these  sheep  is  so  much  finer  and  softer  than  the  common  wool, 
as  to  bear  no  sort  of  comparison  with  it;  it  is  twisted  and  drawn  together  hke  a  cork- 
screw;  its  length  is  generally  about  three  inches,  but  when  drawn  out  it  will  stretch 
to  nearly  double  that  length.  Though  the  wool  is,  when  cleaned,  extremely  white,  yet 
on  the  sheep  it  appears  of  a  yellowish  or  dirty  brown  colour,  owing  to  the  closeness 
of  the  coat,  and  the  condensation  of  the  perspiration  on  the  extremities  of  the  fleece. 
The  wool  commonly  covers  great  part  of  the  head,  and  descends  to  the  hoof  of  the  hind 
feet,  particularly  in  young  sheep;  it  is  also  much  more  greasy  than  the  wool  of  other 

sheep.” 

Neither  Livingston’s  nor  Humphreys’s  sheep  seem  to  have  attracted  much 
attention  for  a  number  of  years.  In  the  absence  of  woolen  factories  there 
was  no  market  for  fine  wool,  while  for  domestic  manufactures  the  wool  of  the 
common  sheep  was  more  satisfactory  as  well  as  cheaper  to  produce.  The 
establishment  of  woolen  factories  gave  rise  to  the  first  demand  for  the  finer 
grades  of  wool.  The  small  available  supply  was  soon  exhausted  and  prices 
rose  to  unheard  of  figures.  In  1810  pure-bred  Merino  wool  sold  for  $2  a 
pound  and  half-blood  at  75  cents,  whereas  common  wool  would  bring  less 
than  40  cents.* 2  In  1814  pure  Merino  wool  at  Steubenville,  Ohio,  sold  for 
$2.75  a  pound.3  The  public  now  became  interested  in  Spanish  sheep  and 
prices  responded  immediately. 

In  1810  Livingston  sold  four  full-bred  rams  at  $1,000  apiece,4  and  Colonel 
Humphreys  disposed  of  two  rams  and  two  ewes  for  $6,ooo.5  Importations 
were  stimulated,  and  owing  to  the  energetic  efforts  of  the  American  consul 
at  Lisbon,  William  Jarvis  of  Vermont,  about  4,000  sheep  were  shipped  in 
the  years  1809  and  1810  from  Spain  to  this  country,  over  one-half  going  to 
New  York  and  New  England  ports.  It  became  so  general  a  practice  for  ships 
touching  at  Spanish  ports  to  bring  back  a  few  Merinos,  that  in  little  over  a 
year  20,000  were  landed  here.  The  fabulous  prices  vanished,  but  the  Spanish 
sheep  still  sold  at  between  $100  and  $300  each  in  Boston  in  1810, 6  and  in 
1813,  in  New  York,  a  lot  of  68  full-blooded  ewes  brought  on  the  average 
over  $125  each.7 

RAPID  SPREAD  OF  MERINOS,  1810-1815. 

With  the  encouragement  of  premiums  from  agricultural  societies  and 
from  State  legislatures  the  Merinos  spread  rapidly  between  1810  and  1815. 

“In  Vermont,  Windsor  County  was  a  famous  centre.  Here,  among  others,  Consul 
Jarvis  kept  his  flock  of  several  hundred  pure  merinos,  picked  from  those  he  had  sent 
over  from  Spain.  In  Massachusetts,  Berkshire  County  was  the  chief  seat.  In  1815  there 
were  reported  to  be  within  a  mile  of  Pittsfield  over  eight  thousand  sheep,  at  least  half  of 
which  were  three  quarters  merino  or  better.  In  Rhode  Island,  the  islands  of  Narragansett 
Bay  held  many  a  valuable  flock.  Humphreys’  was  the  most  noted  in  Connecticut.  New 

2N.  Y.  State  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions,  XXII  (1862),  p.  66.  Quoted  in  Wright,  Wood 

Growing  and  the  Tariff,  23,  a  book  to  which  the  author  acknowledges  indebtedness 
for  many  references  and  facts. 

3  Niles  Register,  XXXV 1,399-  .  f  _ 

4  U.  S.  Bureau  of  Animal  Industry,  Special  Report  on  the  Sheep  Industry,  144. 

5  N.  Y.  Gazette,  March  16,  1810,  quoted  in  U.  S.  Bureau  of  Animal  Industry,  Sheep 

Industry  in  the  United  States,  p.  167. 

6  Ibid.,  198. 

7  Niles  Register,  V  (1813-1814),  p.  207. 


*&&**£*-  . 


*wf  1 

- 

.  . Wajgr 

Sprr>  vc’f  M 

•  *  «r 

p  ’  ? 

■  y  .'i-V-’ 

.V  ‘  *'•  '  i  C.  .  .-VV 

1  At tjiy  .  r rtftKS 

*  Si 

Fig.  27. — Spanish  Merino  ram  (about  1810).  (Reproduced  from  U.  S.  Bureau  of 
Animal  Industry,  Special  Report  on  the  Sheep  Industry. 


Fig.  28. — Electoral  escurial  (Saxony)  ram  No.  177  of  Von  Thaer’s  sheep-fold  at 
Moeglin  in  Prussia.  (Drawn  from  nature  by  Charles  L.  Fleischmann  for  U.  S. 
Patent  Office,  1847.  Reproduced  from  U.  S.  Bureau  of  Animal  Industry,  Special 
Report  on  the  Sheep  Industry. 


LIVESTOCK - IMPROVEMENT  AND  SPECIALIZATION  219 


York  probably  had  more  sheep  than  any  other  state,  Dutchess  County  and  Long  Island 
being  the  homes  of  the  best  stock.  In  New  Jersey,  the  returns  to  the  state  authorities  in 
1814  showed  that  out  of  a  total  of  285,049  sheep,  3,807  were  pure  merinos,  while  25,826 
more  were  grade  merinos.  In  Pennsylvania,  the  prominent  sheep  districts  were  the 
locality  about  Philadelphia  in  the  east  and  \\  ashington  County  in  the  west.  In  Delaware 
and  Maryland,  they  were  to  be  found  about  Wilmington  and  Hagerstown  respectively. 
In  the  W  est,.  there  were  excellent  flocks  in  the  blue-grass  region  of  Kentucky,  and  a 
band  of  merinos  had  been  carried  to  Indiana  when  Rapp  moved  his  colony  to  New 
Harmony  in  1814.  The  chief  center,  however,  was  about  Steubenville,  Ohio,  where  Wells 
and  Dickinson  had  a  large  and  valuable  flock  in  connection  with  their  woolen  mill  The 

neighboring  parts  of  Virginia  and  Pennsylvania,  as  well  as  Ohio,  abounded  in  fine- 
wooled  sheep.  8 


END  OF  THE  MERINO  CRAZE. 

The  popularity  of  the  Merino  sheep  came  to  a  sudden  end  with  the  collapse 
of  the  woolen  industry  and  the  consequent  fall  in  the  price  of  fine  wool. 


In  January  of  1816  merino  wool  was  quoted  at  $1.06  a  pound  in  New  York, 
and  in  October  of  the  same  year  it  had  fallen  to  68  cents.9  After  fluctuating 
between  that  price  and  80  cents  it  reached  a  new  low  figure  of  62  cents  in 
October  of  1819,  and  two  years  later  (July  1821)  fell  to  57  cents.  Seeing 
their  hopes  thus  disappointed,  farmers  turned  against  the  Merinos  with  a 
disgust  as  unreasoning  as  had  been  their  former  enthusiasm.  Many  abandoned 
commercial  wool-growing  and  ruthlessly  sacrificed  their  stock.  They  almost 
drove  them  away  from  their  farms. 

“  Thus  entire  flocks  of  the  finest  merino  sheep  were  devoted  to  the  knife,  for  no  other 
reason  but  that,  contrary  to  the  wish  and  expectation  of  the  owner,  they  would  persist 
in  eating.  The  extent  of  these  sacrifices  is  scarcely  credible.  A  very  respectable  butcher 
assured  me,  that  he  bought,  for  one  dollar  a  head,  a  flock  of  merinos,  among  which 
was  an  imported  ram,  who  the  owner  declared,  and  I  have  no  doubt  truly,  had  cost  one 
thousand  dollars.  That  extravagance  has  now  passed.”  10 

8  Wright,  Wool  Growing  and,  the  Tariff,  29. 

9  Prices  Current  in  N.  Y.  Shipping  and  Commercial  List,  1816. 

10  American  Farmer,  IV  (1822),  p.  70. 


220 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


Only  the  saner  leaders  of  agricultural  opinion  ventured  to  say  a  good  word 
for  the  despised  breed,  pointing  out  their  undoubted  merits  and  predicting 
with  truth  that  they  would  eventually  be  accorded  recognition  as  conferring 
great  benefits  on  American  wool  growers.11 


IMPORTATION  OF  SAXONY  SHEEP. 


About  1821  the  wool  industry  began  to  show  signs  of  recovery  and  in  the 
succeeding  5  or  6  years  another  fine-wool  mania  affected  farmers  in  the  East¬ 
ern  States.  This  time  it  was  the  Saxony  sheep  which  were  the  objects  of 
speculation.  In  1765  Spanish  Merinos  were  taken  to  Saxony,  where  in  the 
course  of  60  years  of  careful  breeding  they  had  developed  into  an  animal 
greatly  different  from  the  original  stock.  (See  fig.  29.)  Extreme  fineness 
of  wool  had  been  developed,  but  at  the  sacrifice  of  size  of  carcass,  weight  of 
fleece,  and  constitutional  vigor. 

“  These  sheep,  when  introduced  into  the  United  States,  lacked  at  least  one-fifth,  and 
often  more,  of  the  weight  of  the  parent  Spanish  Merino,  as  *  then  was  ;  they  were 
longer  legged  in  proportion  to  size,  slimmer,  finer  boned,  and  thinner  in  the  neck 
and  head.  At  every  point  they  gave  indications  of  a  more  delicate  oi:ganlzatl0"ndTf^r^ 
fleeces  averaged  from  one  and  half  to  two  pounds  of  washed  wool  in  ewes,  and  from 

two  to  three  pounds  in  rams.”  12 


The  first  Saxony  sheep  arrived  in  Boston  in  1822,  but  importations  were 
not  large  until  1824,  when  75  animals,  ewes  and  rams,  were  sold  at  auction  at 
Brighton  market.13  Purchasers  from  New  York  as  well  as  from  New  Eng¬ 
land  attended  this  and  subsequent  sales.14  Saxony  sheep  were  also  imported 
at  New  York,  so  that  the  new  breed  received  wide  distribution.  In  1826 
there  were  landed  at  Boston,  New  York,  and  other  ports  2,500  ewes,  rams, 
and  lambs.  This  marked  the  climax ;  the  next  year  prices  declined  greatly, 
several  cargoes  selling  for  about  $15  a  head,  which  was  not  enough  to  coyer 
the  costs  of  transportation.  The  discovery  that  extensive  frauds  were  being 
imposed  upon  American  buyers  was  partly  responsible  for  the  sudden  collapse 
of  prices.  Another  more  important  cause  was  the  depression  in  woolen  man¬ 
ufacturing  in  this  country  and  the  consequent  fall  in  the  price  of  fine  wool.  In 
January  1826,  it  had  sold  in  New  York  for  55  cents ;  in  January  of  the  follow¬ 
ing  year  the  price  was  36  cents.15 


INTEREST  IN  MUTTON  TYPES— NEW  LEICESTERS. 

The  depression  in  wool  prices  caused  the  farmers  in  the  neighborhood  of 
the  largest  towns,  Boston,  Philadelphia,  and  New  York,  to  turn  their  atten¬ 
tion  to  the  production  of  mutton  rather  than  wool.  For  this  purpose  they 
improved  the  native  breed  by  crossing  their  ewes  with  English  rams  of  the 
so-called  Bakewell  or  New  Leicester  breed.  In  1820  the  latter  were  said  to  be 
“  extensively  diffused  in  various  degrees  of  blood  throughout  the  states  of 

11  Address  of  John  Lowell,  Mass.  Agric.  Repository,  V  (1819-1820),  230;  Address  of 

R.  Sullivan,  American  Fariptr,  III  (1821),  p.  58. 

12  Randall,  Fine  Wool  Sheep  Husbandry,  17. 

13  4th  Report,  Agric.  of  Mass.  (1841),  p.  450. 

1  *Ibid.,  Ill  (1824-25),  413;  IV  (1825-26),  391. 

15  Wright,  Wool  Growing  and  the  Tariff,  347. 

\  1 

/ 


LIVESTOCK - IMPROVEMENT  AND  SPECIALIZATION  221 

Pennsylvania  and  New  Jersey.”  16  These  sheep  were  described  by  J.  H. 
Powell,1'  a  progressive  Pennsylvania  farmer,  as  follows: 

different  flocks  of  sheep  called  Bakewell,  which  are  found  in  New  Jersey,  Penn¬ 
s'  vania,  e  aware  and  New  \ork,  are  a  mongrel  race,  derived  principally  from  an 
lrnpor  at  ion  o  is  i  ey,  Teeswater,  and  Southdown  sheep;  or  from  a  few  Teeswater 
s  eep,  \\  ic  were  carried  to  New  York  in  a  prize,  during  the  late  war.  The  char¬ 
acteristics  of  these  breeds,  are  occasionally  detected  in  individuals  of  this  race.  The 
smutty  faces,  finer  wool,  and  smallest  frames,  are  indicative  of  the  Southdown  origin; 

le  largest  frames,  coarser  bone,  heavier  offal,  and  larger  heads,  mark  others  of  the 
c  eeswa-ter  race;  the  long  wool,  often  twisted  at  the  ends,  the  narrow  faces,  broad  backs, 
snort  legs,  and  fine  bone,  prove  the  presence  of  the  Dishley,  or  Bakewell  blood." 

SUMMARY  OF  PROGRESS  TO  1830. 

The  year  1830  marked  the  close  of  the  preliminary  period  of  commercial 
\\ool  growing  in  the  East  a  period  of  experiment,  of  frantic  enthusiasm 
followed  by  equally  irrational  despair.  The  number  of  sheep  had  in¬ 
creased,  especially  in  the  West,  but  this  increase  had  been  mostly  in 
the  common  variety,  whose  wool  was  in  constant  demand  for  household 
industries.  The  violent  fluctuations  in  the  woolen  manufacturing  industry 
had  been  responsible  for  equally  violent  variations  in  the  price  of  the  raw 
material.  The  experiments  with  fine-wool  sheep  had  been  highly  speculative, 
•and  perhaps  on  that  account  they  have  been  given  undue  importance.  Wright’s 
conclusion  is  that  on  the  whole  the  wool-growing  industry  made  quantitatively 
little  advance.  As  a  result  of  the  successive  reactions  against  the  Merino  and 
the  Saxony  sheep,  little  progress  had  been  made  in  building  up  pure-bred 
flocks.  But  the  dispersion  of  the  pure  breeds  had  led  to  the  improvement 
of  the  quality  of  the  common  or  native  animals.  The  latter  still  supplied  the 
raw  material  of  the  household  industries,  moving  westward  with  the  expansion 
of  population  and  of  farming. 


CLIMAX  OF  WOOL  GROWING  IN  THE  EAST. 


In  1830  began  the  period  of  greatest  prosperity  in  Eastern  wool  growing. 
Woolen  manufacturing  was  at  last  firmly  established  and,  encouraged  by 
tariff  protection,  increased  its  output  and  demand  for  raw  material.  The  total 
consumption  of  wool  in  the  factories  was  estimated  in  1837  at  38,300,000 
pounds,  of  which  about  10,000,000  pounds  was  of  foreign  origin.18  Although 
imports  of  raw  wool  increased  rapidly,  the  foreign  shipments  were  confined 
principally  to  coarse  wools  from  South  America  and  from  Turkey  and  its 
Mediterranean  dependencies.  (See  fig.  30.)  Shipments  from  Ohio  and  States 
west  of  the  Alleghenies  had  begun,  but  were  not  large  enough  to  cause  eastern 
growers  serious  concern.  As  a  result,  wool  prices  in  the  East  rose  rapidly 
and  continued  high.  (See  fig.  29,  p.  219.)  Merino  wool,  which  during  the  years 
1825  to  1829  had  been  selling  for  between  40  and  50  cents  a  pound,  reached 
70  cents  in  October  1830.  The  average  of  the  quarterly  quotations  from 


16  Ploughboy,  II  (1820-21),  p.  241. 

17  In  American  Farmer,  VII  (1825),  p.  316. 
19  Benton  and  Barry,  Statistical  View,  etc., 

Tariff,  85. 


quoted  in  Wright,  Wool  Growing  and  the 


222 

MILLIONS 

OF 

POUNDS 

23 

22 

21 

20 

19 

18 

17 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


Fig.  30. — Imports  of  wool  (1822-1846),  U.  S.  Commerce  and 

Navigation  Reports. 


LIVESTOCK - IMPROVEMENT  AND  SPECIALIZATION  223 

then  until  January  1837  was  65  cents ;  at  the  later  date  the  price  was  72  cents. 
Common  wool  followed  very  closely  the  fluctuations  in  the  fine  grade. 

\\  ith  such  encouragement  wool  growing  flourished  everywhere,  and  in  the 
Cast  the  number  of  sheep  reached  its  maximum.  There  was  renewed  specula¬ 
te  e  activity  in  the  production  of  fine  wool  from  Saxony  sheep,  but  the  common 
breed  also  were  not  neglected.  In  1840  the  census  estimate  fixed  the  number 
of  sheep  in  the  country  at  I9>300>00(T  of  which  nearly  60  per  cent  were  in 
New  England  and  the  Middle  Atlantic  States.  With  the  increase  in  numbers 
came  also  increased  tendency  to  specialization.  Before  1830  it  had  been  ob- 
ser\ed  that  the  rising  price  of  land  around  Boston  had  caused  a  movement 
of  sheep-raising  westward  into  the  interior.19  By  1840  a  well-defined  wool¬ 
growing  area  in  New  England  had  developed  in  Vermont  and  the  Berkshire 
region  of  western  Massachusetts  and  Connecticut.  In  Vermont  official  returns 
indicated  an  increase  of  1,000,000  sheep  in  the  years  1832  to  1837,  with  a 
decrease  of  40,000  head  of  cattle  in  the  same  period.20  In  Berkshire  the 

success  of  wool-growers  was  causing  decreased  attention  to  dairying  and 
tillage.21 


THE  IMPORTATION  OF  ENGLISH  CATTLE. 

The  leadership  in  the  improvement  of  cattle,  as  well  as  sheep,  came  from 
a  few  wealthy  men  who  made  a  hobby  of  progressive  farming.  Their  atten¬ 
tion  was  directed  to  the  importation  of  representatives  of  English  stock 
rather  than  to  the  betterment  of  the  native  or  common  animals  by  selective 
breeding.  A  few  English  cattle  were  brought  to  this  country  before  1800, 
probably  of  the  Lancashire  or  Bakewell  breed,  but  the  period  of  greatest 
activity  dates  from  about  1820.  Between  that  date  and  1840,  representatives 
of  all  the  important  English  breeds  had  been  introduced,  including  Herefords, 
North  Devons,  Alderneys,  and  Guernseys  and,  most  important  of  all,  the 
Improved  Durhams  or  Shorthorns.  They  were  kept  with  great  care  by  their 
owners  and  exhibited  frequently  at  the  annual  cattle  shows,  where  they  at¬ 
tracted  much  attention.  Auction  sales  of  pure-blood  stock  were  social  events 
in  the  neighborhood  of  New  York  and  Philadelphia,  where  distinguished  city 
folk  vied  with  one  another  in  paying  high  prices  for  animals  of  exceptional 
pedigrees.  .  The  efforts  of  cattle-breeding  enthusiasts  in  this  period  were 
directed  chiefly  to  building  up  herds  of  pure-blood  stock.  The  improvement  of 
native  stock  by  judicious  crossing  of  breeds  seems  to  have  hardly  begun 
before  1840.22 


THE  NATIVE  CATTLE. 

The  cows  of  the  common  or  so-called  native  breed  showed  little  improve¬ 
ment  over  their  colonial  ancestors.  Those  who  fattened  cattle  found  it  profitable 
to  provide  comfortable  shelter  and  nutritious  rations,  but  the  market  influences 
seem  not  to  have  reached  back  to  the  breeders.  Except  in  a  few  instances, 
no  attempt  had  been  made  to  improve  stock  by  selection  in  breeding;  often 

19  Mass.  Agricultural  Repository,  X  (1828-32),  p.  125. 

20  The  Cultivator,  VI  (1839-40),  P-  102. 

21  2d  Report,  Agriculture  of  Massachusetts  (1838),  p.  136. 

22  Connecticut  State  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions  (1854),  p.  99. 


224 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


the  likeliest  heifers  were  sold  to  the  butcher.  In  winter  they  stood  in  cold 
stables,  often  with  the  snow  piled  on  their  backs  and  with  no  fodder  but  hay. 
Colman  23  exclaimed  with  the  indignation  of  a  humanitarian  as  well  as  of  an 

economist : 

“The  result  is  what  might  be  expected;  and  there  is  nothing  more  striking  nor  more 
painful  to  a  benevolent  observer,  than  the  withered,  lean,  lanthorn-visaged  condition  in 
which  the  stock  of  the  farmers  of  New  England  generally  come  out  in  the  spring 
Even  their  milch  cows,  who  pay  for  their  keeping  in  the  most  honorable  manner  and 
whom  the  farmer  should  as  little  think  of  stinting  and  half-starving  as  he  would  his 
children,  since  without  them,  he  could  not  raise  his  children,  are  treated  with  a  se\erit>, 
which  admits  of  no  apology;  and  which  is  as  inconsistent  with  the  farmers  true 
interests,  as  with  the  dictates  of  common  justice  and  mercy.” 

A  contributor  to  the  Cultivator 24  described  the  native  cows  in  more  careful 
phrases : 

“They  are  a  mixture  of  every  breed,  and  the  intelligent  and  observing  breeder,  sees 
in  them  traces  of  almost  all  the  English  varieties,  such  perhaps  as  they  were  before 
science  and  attention  had  improved  them,  such  as  might  offer  to  the  American  breeder 
the  original  materials  of  their  most  improved  and  valued  stock,  but  requiring  more  time 
and  perhaps  more  talent,  skill  and  attention,  than  the  American  farmer  would  be 
willing  to  bestow  on  the  subject,  and  yet  necessary  to  enable  him  to  arrive  at  the  same 
results.  This  mixed  breed  are  not  very  celebrated  for  any  thing;  some  of  them  are 
good  milkers  as  far  as  quantity  is  concerned,  but  as  to  quality  of  the  milk  and  aptitude 
to  fatten,  they  generally  fail.  Their  calves  are  of  diminutive  size,  rarely  giving  more 
than  20  lbs.  per  qr.  when  killed,  at  four  weeks  old;  and  if  reared,  of  slow  growth, 
seldom  coming  in  till  the  third  year,  and  then  requiring  two  or  three  years  more  to  give 
them  standing  and  character,  such  as  it  is,  in  the  dairy.  As  to  their  characteristic  mar  s, 
they  are  small,  short  bodied,  thin  and  coarse  haired,  steep  jumped,  slab  sided,  having 
little  aptitude  to  fatten,  or  to  lay  the  fat  on  the  right  place. 

The  weights  of  cows  when  slaughtered  averaged  45°  pounds ;  steers 
weighed  600  pounds  and  oxen  875  pounds.25 


BEEF  PRODUCTION  IN  THE  CONNECTICUT  VALLEY. 


Beef  production  as  a  specialized  industry  showed  considerable  expansion 
in  the  East  in  this  period,  with  increasing  concentration  in  the  areas  in  which 
it  was  already  well  established  by  1800,  viz.:  the  Connecticut  Valley  and  the 
southeastern  counties  of  Pennsylvania.  At  the  beginning  of  the  nineteenth 
century,  grazing  had  been  accounted  a  profitable  business  in  any  of  the  in 
terior  counties  ”  of  Massachusetts,  but  during  the  years  1800  to  1840  the 
competition  of  other  lines  of  farming,  wool-growing  in  the  western  counties 
and  market  gardening  in  the  eastern  led  to  increasing  concentration  of  beef- 
fattening  in  the  counties  bordering  on  the  Connecticut  River.  In  1817,  Dickin¬ 
son  wrote  of  Deerfield,  Massachusetts . 2 

“  500  of  the  finest  cattle,  mostly  purchased  of  the  farmers  in  the  upland  towns, 

are  annually  fed,  in  the  best  manner,  from  the  beginning  of  December  to  May,  the 
weight  of  which  may  be  computed  at  550, 000,  and  tlto  proceeds  of  their  sale  in  market, 
at  $40,000,  with  a  profit  of  about  one  half  the  amount.”  


23  Addresses  at  New  Haven,  Norwich  and  Hartford,  Connecticut,  in  1840,  p.  5 7* 

2*  The  Cultivator,  V  (1838-39),  P-  23.  „  .  ,  D  .  .  j-r1Jnur(, 

23  Estimates  of  the  official  reporter  of  the  Brighton  Market  in  4th  Report,  Agriculture 

of  Massachusetts  (1841),  p.  302.  Other  estimates  are  to  be  found,  Ibid.,  p.  5L  in 
American  Farmer,  VII  (1825),  p.  113. 

26  Description  of  Deerfield,  5- 


LIVESTOCK - IMPROVEMENT  AND  SPECIALIZATION  225 


The  fertile  ‘  intervales  ’  or  bottom  lands  of  the  river  supplied  an  abun¬ 
dance  of  hay,  which  was  supplemented  by  commeal,  peas,  oats,  and  potatoes. 
Experiments  were  made  with  rations  of  broom-corn  seed  and  oil-cake.  In 
Franklin  County,  Massachusetts,  beef  fattening,  chiefly  stall  feeding,  was  the 
chief  interest  of  farmers  in  1840.  Colman  described  the  business  as  follows  : 27 

The  fatters  of  beef  depend,  for  their  cattle  to  be  stall-fed,  upon  animals  brought 
from  Vermont,  Xew  Hampshire,  and  New  York.  In  these  cases  the  experienced  and 
practical  have  great  skill  and  shrewdness  in  selecting  small-boned,  neat,  and  thrifty 
animals  as  the  best  for  their  purposes.  Many  of  them  find  great  advantage  ‘  in  turning 
their  cattle  soon,  rather  than  keeping  them  on  hand  a  long  time.  After  graduating  a 
class  early  in  the  season,  they  go  into  the  neighboring  hill-towns  and  purchase  fat 
cattle  already  far  advanced  for  the  market,  and  finish  them  so  as  to  have  another  class 
to  send  off  in  the  spring.  These  cattle  are  generally  fed  upon  hay  and  potatoes  in  the 
hill-towns,  where  corn  is  not  raised  to  any  considerable  extent  as  in  the  river-towns ;  but 
when  brought  to  the  river-towns  they  are  fed  almost  exclusively  upon  hay  and  meal, 
and  the  change  of  diet  greatly  favors  their  thrift.  Another  kind  of  stock  much  approved 
for  stall-feeding  are  three  and  four  year  old  steers,  which  are  kept  well  in  the  winter 
upon  good  hay,  and  for  about  two  months  in  the  last  of  the  winter  and  first  of  the 
spring  have  a  moderate  allowance  of  provender,  such  as  the  meal  of  Indian  corn,  or 
corn  and  oats  or  pease  and  oats  ground  together,  and  are  then  turned  into  the  pastures 
as  soon  as  they  can  get  a  living.  In  a  good  pasture  these  animals  do  well,  and  are 
generalh  sent  to  market  in  June  and  July,  when  they  command  a  good  price.” 

At  the  end  of  our  period  the  farmers  of  Franklin  County  were  discouraged. 
The  price  of  stock  cattle  in  the  fall  was  as  high  per  hundred  pounds  as  that 
obtained  for  fat  steers  in  the  spring,  and  the  markets  were  capricious  and 
uncertain.  The  farmers  suspected  the  drovers,  who  took  their  cattle  on  com¬ 
mission,  s  and  the  butcher  who  bought  them,  of  collusion  and  fraud,  which 
they  lacked  effectual  means  to  prevent.  They  were  inclined  to  feel  fortunate 
if  at  the  end  of  the  season  s  operations  they  were  able  to  pay  the  notes  given 
to  local  banks  for  the  purchase  of  stock.  Allowing  current  prices  for  the 
grain  and  hay  consumed  their  accounts  showed  production  at  less  than  cost, 
but  as  Colman  pointed  out,  they  did  not  credit  the  cattle  account  with  the 
value  of  the  manure  produced  and  returned  to  the  farm. 

THE  BRIGHTON  CATTLE  MARKET. 

Connecticut  Valley  cattle  were  occasionally  marketed  in  New  York,  but 
most  of  them  were  driven  to  the  historic  Brighton  market  just  outside  of 
Boston.  In  this  town  a  weekly  cattle  fair  had  been  held  since  Revolutionary 
days.29  Farmers,  drovers,  butchers  and  commission  men  met  there  on  Mon¬ 
days  to  buy  and  sell.  Wrote  Colman : 30 

“Cattle,  sheep  and  swine  are  brought  here  from  the  interior  of  the  State,  from 
Maine,  New  Hampshire,  Vermont — from  New  York,  and  sometimes  from  Pennsyl¬ 
vania,  Ohio,  Indiana  and  Kentucky.  Ordinarily  few  sheep  are  ever  brought  to  market 
except  it  be  wethers  fatted  or  to  be  fatted.  Great  numbers  of  pigs  and  shoats  are 
driven  here  to  be  sold  for  keeping,  but  except  an  occasional  drove  from  some  dis¬ 
tillery  establishment  few  fat  hogs  are  sold  here  either  alive  or  dead.  Nor  is  it  any 

27  4th  Report ,  Agric.  of  Massachusetts  (1841),  p.  54. 

28  The  cost  of  droving  to  Brighton  was  $2  per  head  plus  the  loss  of  about  100  pounds 

in  weight. 

29  The  picturesque  features  of  the  fair  were  described  by  Hawthorne  in  his  American 

Note  Books,  Collected  Works  (nth  ed.,  1887),  IX,  p.  248. 

30  4th  Report,  Agriculture  of  Massachusetts  (1841),  p.  297. 

16 


226  AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 

mart  for  horses,  though  occasionally  they  are  brought  here  for  sale.  The  cattle 
principally  consist  of  young  stock  for  wintering,  working  oxen,  milch  cows  with 
their  calves,  and  fat  cattle  for  barrelling  and  for  the  retail  market  in  the  city  and 
vicinity.  The  cattle  for  barrelling  are  taken  at  once  to  the  large  slaughtering  and 
packing  establishments,  where  they  are  disposed  of  accordingly;  and  fat  cattle  are 
likewise  purchased  for  the  butchers  by  the  slaughterers,  who  kill  and  dress  for  one 
dollar  per  head  with  the  customary  perquisites,  or  else  purchase  and  kill  on  their  own 
account,  and  supply  the  marketmen  in  the  city  and  vicinity  with  such  beef  and  with  such 
amounts  of  beef  as  they  may  desire.  The  drover  generally  waits  for  two  or  three  days 
until  he  gets  the  returned  weight  of  his  cattle  after  being  slaughtered,  and  receives  his 
money.  The  butchers  who  come  from  a  distance  in  order  to  get  supplies  for  the  small 
and  remote  villages  and  towns,  of  course  drive  their  cattle  to  their  respective  homes  to 
be  slaughtered ;  and  large  numbers  go  from  hence  to  Lowell,  New  Bedford,  Fall  River, 
Providence,  R.  I.  and  other  considerable  towns.  The  number  of  head  of  cattle,  of  all 
descriptions,  brought  here  frequently  exceeds  eight  thousand  on  a  market-day.  Five 
thousand  sheep  have  sometimes  been  driven  there  in  a  single  day.  The  cattle  are  often 
sold  on  the  hoof — which  is,  on  many  accounts,  a  preferable  mode  for  both  parties,  as  it 
leaves  no  room  for  fraud  or  suspicion  of  fraud  in  regard  to  their  weight.” 

BEGINNING  OF  MARKET  INFORMATION  SERVICE. 

Beginning  in  1830,  market  reports  were  issued  weekly,  giving  the  number 
of  animals  of  various  kinds  sold  and  notes  on  the  average  prices  prevailing. 
The  reports  appeared  Tuesday  morning  in  the  Boston  papers  and  were  widely 
copied  in  journals  having  a  circulation  throughout  the  state. 

“  Before  this  arrangement,  farmers  and  drovers  in  the  interior  depended  on  mere 
rumors,  which  seldom  reached  them  in  season  to  regulate  their  movements  in  regard 
to  the  market,  and  were  not  always  to  be  relied  on.  The  exact  reports  now  given,  are 
received  with  confidence,  and  are  of  great  importance  to  the  farmers  and  drovers.  They 
now  learn  whether  the  markets  are  glutted  or  thin,  and  the  prices  which  they  may 
calculate  upon.  This  saves  them  from  many  mistakes  and  disappointments.”  31 

A  typical  report  is  that  of  Monday,  April  3,  1837. 32 

“  At  Market  280  Beef  Cattle,  40  pairs  Working  Oxen,  235  Sheep  and  760  Swine. 

“  Prices — Beef  Cattle. — An  advance  was  realized  and  we  advance  our  quotation  viz. 
extra  at  $9.50;  first  quality  $850  a  900;  second  quality  $800  a  850;  third  quality 

$6  75  a  $7  75-  .  ..  .... 

“  Working  Oxen. — A  large  proportion  were  ordinary  and  purchasers  were  unwilling 

to  pay  the  prices  asked.  We  notice  a  few  sales  only  viz:  $80,  $85,  $100,  and  115. 

"  Sheep.— We  notice  a  lot  taken  at  $5.25  each,  a  lot  at  $8  00  each,  a  lot  of  100  from 
Conway  at  $11  each  and  a  lot  from  Princeton  at  $20  each. 

“Swine—  We  notice  the  sale  of  several  lots  at  ill  for  sows  and  nf  for  barrows. 
At  retail  ii?  a  12I  and  13.” 

The  average  number  of  animals  of  various  kinds  sold  each  year  at  Brighton 
in  the  10  years  1831  to  1840  was  as  follows:  beef  cattle,  36,600;  stores, 
12,900;  sheep,  97,793;  swine,  22, 700. 33 

WESTERN  CATTLE  IN  EASTERN  MARKETS. 

The  occasional  presence  of  cattle  from  Kentucky,  Ohio,  and  Illinois  at 
Brighton  in  the  years  1830  to  1840,  indicates  the  beginnings  of  western  com¬ 
petition.  Such  competition  was  sporadic,  however,  occurring  only  when  the 

3!  4th  Report,  Agriculture  of  Massachusetts  (1841),  p.  301. 

32  Quoted  in  New  England  Farmer,  XV  (1836-37),  p.  31 1. 

33  4th  Report,  Agriculture  of  Massachusetts  (1841),  p.  302. 


LIVESTOCK - IMPROVEMENT  AND  SPECIALIZATION  227 

New  York  market  was  overstocked.34  Just  before  1840,  the  railroads  were 
being  used  occasionally  to  transport  livestock  to  Brighton,  a  few  yokes  of  very 
large  cattle,  a  drove  of  sheep,  and,  in  extremely  cold  or  hot  weather,  consider¬ 
able  numbers  of  swine,  but  for  regular  shipments  freight  rates  were  too  high. 

CATTLE  GRASS-FATTENED  IN  MAINE. 

Grass-fattened  cattle  and  sheep  were  driven  from  Maine  to  the  markets 
at  Salem  and  Boston,  beginning  about  1820  at  the  rate  of  several  thousand 
each  year.  The  cattle  were  sometimes  taken  “  on  drift,”  the  commission  for 
driving  and  selling  amounting  to  $2  per  head.  The  quality  of  Maine  beef,  if 
the  following  description  is  accurate,  could  not  have  been  highly  regarded. 
The  editor  of  the  Maine  Farmer  35  wrote: 

“  Much  of  the  beef  made  in  this  vicinity  is  from  cows  which,  through  age,  have  be¬ 
come  unfit  for  the  dairy,  and  from  oxen  which  are  worn  out  with  hard  labor.  It  is 
customary  to  milk  the  cows  until  August  or  September,  and  as  soon  as  they  can  be  dried 
of  their  milk,  begin  to  feed  them,  first  with  green  corn  stalks,  small  corn,  potatoes 
and  meal;  and  the  value  of  the  feed  given  them  is  generally  much  more  than  the  value 
of  the  beef  when  slaughtered.  The  oxen  intended  for  beef  are  generally  worked  in  the 
spring  as  long  as  they  are  able  to  drag  the  plough,  because  it  is  the  last  springs  work 
which  they  will  do,  for  the  owner  intends  to  fatten  them.” 

The  prices  received  by  Maine  farmers  for  their  stock  in  1835  and  1836 
were:  For  i-year-olds,  $3  to  $5;  2-year-olds,  $7  to  $10;  3-year-olds,  $10  to 
$15;  cows,  $10  to  $12;  oxen,  per  pair,  $35  to  $40.36 

CATTLE  FATTENING  IN  CHESTER  COUNTY,  PENNSYLVANIA. 

In  southeastern  Pennsylvania,  especially  in  Chester  County,  cattle  were 
fattened  for  the  Philadelphia  and  New  York  markets.  As  early  as  1819  the 
business  was  so  prosperous  that  grazing  farms  in  the  neighborhood  of  Phila¬ 
delphia  were  selling  at  from  $100  to  $300  per  acre.37  The  stock  came  from 
many  sources,  from  Maryland,  Virginia  and  South  Carolina;  from  Ohio, 
and  from  northern  and  western  New  York.  William  Darlington 38  wrote 
in  1828: 

“They  [the  stock  cattle]  are  of  various  sizes,  and  the  average  weight,  in  a  lean 
state,  may  be  estimated  at  about  500  pounds,  and  when  killed  for  beef,  at  about  700  or 
800  pounds.  The  greater  portion  are  fattened  on  pasture  during  the  summer,  but  for 
fattening  large  oxen  a  longer  time  is  required,  and  they  are  fed  most  successfully  during 
the  winter  season.  These  are  usually  fed  about  one  year,  running  on  good  pasture 
through  the  summer,  and  stall-fed,  through  the  winter,  on  meal,  made  of  maize  and  oats 
ground  together.” 

DAIRY  PRODUCTS— CHEESE,  BUTTER,  MILK. 

The  readjustments  in  eastern  farming  caused  by  the  rise  of  manufactures 
are  clearly  evident  in  the  regional  distribution  of  dairy  products.  In  the 

34  4*h  Report ,  Agriculture  of  Massachusetts  (1841),  305.;  New  York  Farmer ,  III  (1830) 
p.  146;  New  England  Farmer ,  XIII  11834-35),  p.  354. 

85  I  (1833),  P- 5i. 

36  Maine  Bd.  Agric.  igth  Annual  Report  (1874),  p.  275. 

37  Johnson,  Letters  from  Pennsylvania,  p.  76. 

3*  American  Farmer,  X  (1828),  p.  66. 


228  AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 

neighborhood  of  the  larger  cities  the  sale  of  milk  had  largely  supplanted  the 
making  of  cheese,  and  of  butter  as  well,  except  for  small  amounts  of  the 
fresh  article  for  immediate  sale.  A  great  many  farms  within  a  distance  of 
12  to  14  miles  of  Boston  were  selling  milk  daily  to  the  city.  The  larger  pro¬ 
ducers.  those  with  40  or  more  cows,  evidently  did  their  own  peddling;  the 
smaller  farmers,  keeping  4  or  5  cows,  sold  their  milk  to  dealers.39  The  winter 
ration  included  carrots  and  potatoes  as  well  as  cornmeal  and  hay.  Experiments 
in  soiling  had  been  made,  but  the  practice  was  not  generally  adopted.40 

In  the  neighborhood  of  New  York  there  were  a  number  of  large  milk 
farms  keeping  several  hundred  cows  each,  some  of  them  in  connection  with 
distilleries,  from  the  waste  of  which  they  received  a  large  part  of  their  fod¬ 
der.  In  general,  the  milk  furnished  to  New  York  did  not  have  a  high  reputa¬ 
tion  and  complaints  of  adulteration  were  frequent.41 

The  production  of  butter  and  cheese  as  a  commercial  industry  was  found 
in  1840  chiefly  north  of  New  York  city,  in  the  Berkshires,  and  in  a  newly 
developed  section  in  central  New  York  State.  In  these  areas  dairying  was  a 
safe  and  profitable  business.  With  increasing  urban  concentration  and  a  rising 
standard  of  life  in  the  cities,  their  markets  were  steadily  expanding,  and  in 
addition  they  furnished  most  of  the  cheese  consumed  in  Pennsylvania,  along 
the  southern  seaboard,  and  in  the  Mississippi  and  Ohio  Valleys.  In  the 
Berkshire  region  of  western  Massachusetts  and  Connecticut  the  manufacture 
of  butter  and  cheese  for  sale  furnished  strong  competition  with  wool-growing 
for  the  farmer’s  land,  labor,  and  capital.  The  market  for  dairy  products  was 
New  York,  accessible  via  the  Hudson  River.  Colman’s  study  43  of  two  Berk¬ 
shire  towns  showed  that  on  45  farms  in  Cheshire,  913  cows  were  kept  which 
produced  for  sale  311,050  pounds  of  cheese  and  19,050  pounds  of  butter. 
In  Pittsfield,  221  farms  kept  812  cows,  which  produced  58,046  pounds  of 
butter  and  26,048  pounds  of  cheese. 

WESTWARD  SHIFT  OF  DAIRYING.— DEVELOPMENTS  IN 

CENTRAL  NEW  YORK. 

In  New  York  State,  Orange  and  Ulster  Counties  had  long  been  producing 
high-grade  butter  and  cheese  for  market.44  With  the  opening  of  the  Erie 
Canal  a  new  area  of  dairying  developed  in  the  Mohawk  Valley,  concentrated 
chiefly  in  Herkimer  and  Oneida  Counties,  but  extending  also  to  some  parts  ol 
Fulton  and  Saratoga  Counties.  Since  about  1780  the  Mohawk  Valley  had 
been  one  of  the  chief  wheat-producing  areas  of  the  north.  The  transition  from 
wheat-growing  to  dairying  after  1825  was  the  result  partly  of  the  competition 
of  Genesee  wheat,  now  cheaply  transported  via  the  canal,  in  the  New  York 
market,  and  partly  of  the  ravages  of  the  grain  worm,  which  first  appeared 
there  between  1825  and  1830*  The  canal,  moreover,  afforded  the  ^Mohawk 

X. - - -  11 

30  4th  Report,  Agriculture  of  Massachusetts  (1841),  pp.  198,  252.  . 

40  See  letter  of  Hon.  Josiah  Quincy,  Dec.  27,  1815,  in  American  Farmer,  II  (1820-21;, 

p.  292. 

4!  4th  Report,  Agriculture  of  Massachusetts  (1841),  p.  253* 

42  The  Cultivator,  III  (1836-37),  p.  41. 

43  2d  Report,  Agriculture  of  Massachusetts  (1838),  pp.  59>  106-122. 

44  John  Burroughs,  in  My  Boyhood,  pp.  11-23,  describes  the  production  and  marketing 

of  butter  in  Ulster  County  about  1840. 


LIVESTOCK - IMPROVEMENT  AND  SPECIALIZATION  229 


Valley  farmers  cheap  transportation  for  their  cheese.  From  six  towns  the 
exports  of  cheese  for  1832  were  estimated  at  1,000  tons ;  from  one  town  alone 
about  400  tons  were  sold.45  Only  in  one  town,  Steuben,  was  butter  produced 
for  market.  1  he  peculiar  ability  of  the  Welsh  immigrants  who  settled  there 
was  probably  the  cause  of  its  specialization.  Although  a  small  town  (2,000 
inhabitants,  1840),  in  1832  it  sent  150  tons  of  butter  to  the  New  York  market. 
Marketing  conditions  were  good ;  large  dealers  of  New  York  and  other  cities 
came  to  select  and  purchase  their  supplies. 

One  of  the  results  of  the  growth  of  commercial  dairying  in  this  section, 
besides  a  higher  income  for  farmers,  was  a  tendency  to  larger-scale  produc¬ 
tion  and  an  increase  in  the  size  of  farms.  A  pioneer  in  the  industry  wrote  to 
The  Cultivator : 46 

“  Most  of  the  little  farms  are  now  so  amalgamated,  that  it  is  said  to  be  difficult  to 
sustain  district  schools,  and  open  roads  in  winter,  or  hire  any  laborers  by  the  day  in 
some  sections . ” 


OUTPUT  OF  DAIRY  COWS. 

Judging  by  current  estimates,  the  productivity  of  dairy  cows  had  consider¬ 
ably  increased  between  1800  and  1840.  At  the  earlier  date,  according  to 
answers  to  the  inquiries  of  the  Massachusetts  Society  for  Promoting  Agricul¬ 
ture,  70  to  100  pounds  of  butter  or  from  50  to  150  pounds  of  skim-milk 
cheese  were  considered  fair  amounts  for  ordinary  cows.47  About  1830  it  was 
estimated  that  a  milch  cow  of  medium  quality  in  Massachusetts  would  give 
1,500  quarts  of  milk  in  a  year,  which  would  make  1 66  pounds  of  butter  or 
375  pounds  of  cheese.48  In  New  York  State,  about  1835,  a  good  cow  “  under 
proper  management  ”  was  expected  to  produce  200  pounds  of  butter  a  year 
or  between  300  and  400  pounds  of  cheese.  One  farmer  in  Herkimer  County 
produced  32,000  pounds  of  cheese  from  78  cows,  averaging  410  pounds  each.49 
The  increase  in  productivity  is  explained  partly  by  better  food  and  shelter 
and  partly  by  better  management  of  calves,  taking  them  earlier  from  their 
mothers. 


SWINE  SHOW  MARKED  IMPROVEMENT. 

In  no  class  of  domestic  animal  was  such  striking  improvement  effected  as  in 
swine.  Coming  early  to  maturity,  they  are  easily  modified  in  type  by  selective 
breeding  and  consequently  the  results  of  crossing  with  improved  breeds  im¬ 
ported  from  England,  China,  and  Spain  were  soon  obvious.  The  introduction 
of  the  Woburn  or  Bedford  hogs  from  England  dates  from  the  end  of  the 
eighteenth  century.  They  first  became  common  in  Maryland,  Delaware,  and 
Virginia,  and  later  were  bred  by  Colonel  Timothy  Pickering  in  Massachusetts, 
where  they  were  soon  widely  known. 

“  There  is  no  doubt  they  were  splendid  animals,  with  many  fine  points,  small  bones, 
deep,  round  barrel,  short  legs,  feeding  easily,  and  maturing  early,  and  often  weighing 


45  New  York  Farmer ,  VI  (1833),  p.  290. 

40  Letter  of  Ephraim  Perkins,  I  (1834-35),  p.  84. 

47 Massachusetts  Agricultural  Repository,  V  (1818-19),  p.  74. 

48  Ibid.,  X  (1828-1832),  p.  312. 

49  New  York  Farmer,  IX  (1836),  p.  108;  The  Cultivator,  I  (1834-35),  p.  84. 


230 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


at  a  year  or  a  year  and  a  half  old,  from  four  to  seven  hundred  pounds,  with  light  offal, 
and  the  first  quality  of  flesh.  They  were  mostly  white  somewhat  spotted. 

In  New  York  there  was  developed  early  in  the  century  a  type  known  as  the 
grass-fed  hog.  They  were  described  as  having 

“short  legs  and  noses,  white  sleek  hair,  small  bones,  and  may  be  called  a  very  comely, 
fat,  indolent,  good  natured  sort  of  swine— a  race  of  animals  in  which  the  devil  would 

never  think  of  entering  for  any  mischievous  purposes . 

“  In  point  of  profit  there  can  be  no  kind  of  comparison  between  the  best  of  the  grass 
breeds  and  the  old  lean  sort  of  swine;  while  the  latter  usually  cost  more  in  raising  and 
preparing  for  market  than  they  are  worth;  the  former  afford  a  handsome  profit  to 
those  who  raise  them,  but  more  especially  if  the  rearing  of  them  be  suitably  combined 
with  the  business  of  the  dairy.”  51 

At  the  age  of  18  months  or  2  years  the  grass  breed  would  weigh  (dressed) 
between  300  and  450  pounds.52 

Many  other  breeds  were  developed  from  imported  animals  in  various 
localities— the  Byfield  and  the  Mackay  breed  in  Massachusetts  and  the 
Chester  County  Whites  in  Pennsylvania.  There  was  at  least  one  epidemic  of 
speculative  fever  in  swine-breeding,  connected  with  the  importation  of  Berk¬ 
shire  hogs  about  1830.  Although  excellent  animals,  they  were  too  delicately 
organized  for  the  rough  and  ready  methods  of  treatment  in  this  country,  and 
farmers  who  had  bought  them  at  high  prices  lost  heavily.53  In  general,  how¬ 
ever,  the  new  breeds  adapted  themselves  successfully  to  American  conditions. 
By  1840  the  old  race  of  native  swine  had  almost  disappeared.  A  contributor 
to  the  New  England  Farmer  54  wrote  : 

“  Formerly  New  England  was  over-run  with  a  raw-boned  lank-sided  race  of  animals, 
which  devoured  the  substance  of  the  farmer,  and  like  Pharioh’s  [sic]  lean  kine,  ‘  were 
still  ill-favored  and  lean  as  before,’  and  whose  chief  return  to  the  owner,  was  skin, 
bone,  and  bristles.  But  we  think  we  may  now  congratulate  the  Society  on  the  almost 
entire  extinction  of  this  race,  whose  very  existence  was  a  waste,  and  whose  disgustful 
and  uncouth  appearance  was  a  mere  nuisance.  We  now  generally  find  a  small  boned, 
well  proportioned  breed  of  Swine,  whose  handsome  appearance  and  good  qualities, 
abundantly  compensate  for  the  exchange.” 

The  market  demand  did  not  lead  to  as  marked  geographical  concentration 
in  the  case  of  swine  as  of  cattle  in  the  East.  The  increase  in  numbers  which 
undoubtedly  occurred  was  widespread,  but  was  especially  notable  in  dairying 
regions,  such  as  the  Berkshires,  where  they  were  fed  on  cheese  whey  and 
skim  milk.  It  was  estimated  that  there  one  hog  was  kept  for  every  four  cows.55 
Pork  was  produced  as  a  by-product  at  distilleries,  where  swine  were  fed  on 
the  mash,  and  large  numbers  were  fattened  on  the  offal  from  slaughter-houses 
in  the  vicinity  of  the  cities. 

COMPETITION  OF  WESTERN  SWINE  AND  PORK. 

Western  competition  from  western  New  York  and  Ohio  in  swine  and  salt 
pork  was  more  seriously  felt  by  Eastern  farmers  than  in  any  other  kind  of 

50  Flint,  in  Kettell,  Eighty  Years’  Progress,  I,  63. 

51  The  Ploughboy,  II  (1820-21),  p.  234. 

52  N.  Y.  Bd.  Agric.,  Memoirs,  II  (1823),  p.  77. 

53  Coburn,  Swine  Husbandry,  42. 

54  XI  (1832-33),  P-  126. 

55  Second  Report,  Agriculture  of  Massachusetts  (1838),  p.  74. 


LIVESTOCK - IMPROVEMENT  AND  SPECIALIZATION  231 


livestock.  Worcester  County,  Massachusetts,  which  about  1830  was  sending 
out  2,000,000  pounds  of  pork  to  Boston,  in  1836  was  buying  western  pork 
from  Boston.50  In  1840  the  swine  sold  at  Brighton  came  principally  from 
New  York  State.5'  In  the  Mohawk  Valley  as  early  as  1828  farmers  were 
complaining  that  they  could  no  longer  advantageously  make  pork  for  the 
Albany  and  New  York  markets.  “  The  farmers  to  the  West,  where  Indian 
corn  is  cheap,  can  now,  assisted  by  the  canal,  afford  to  undersell  us.”  58 

DRAFT  ANIMALS. 

In  New  York  and  Pennsylvania  there  seems  to  have  been  an  increasing  use 
of  horses  instead  of  oxen  in  farm  work,  especially  after  the  introduction  of 
hay-rakes,  cultivators,  and  other  horse-drawn  tools.  The  New  Englanders 
clung  to  their  oxen,  using  them  still  in  preference  to  horses  for  plowing  and 
teaming.  A  single  horse  was  kept  by  well-to-do  farmers  “  to  go  to  mill,  and 
to  church,  and  for  the  convenience  of  the  family.”  Occasionally  a  horse  was 
hitched  ahead  of  a  yoke  of  oxen  to  add  strength  to  the  team.  In  the  East, 
little  attention  was  given  to  improving  the  breed  of  horses,  except  those  used 
for  pleasure  driving  and  riding.  In  the  West,  horses  were  much  more  used 
than  in  the  Eastern  States,  many  farmers  keeping  a  half  dozen  or  more. 

“  Much  of  the  travelling  throughout  the  western  country,  both  by  men  and  women, 
is  performed  on  horseback;  and  a  large  proportion  of  the  land  carriage  is  by  means 
of  large  wagons,  with  from  four  to  six  stout  horses  for  a  team.  A  great  proportion 
of  the  ploughing  is  performed  by  horse  labor.  Horses  are  more  subject  to  diseases 
in  this  country  than  in  the  old  States,  which  is  thought  to  be  occasioned  by  bad  manage¬ 
ment,  rather  than  by  the  climate.  A  good  farm  horse  can  be  purchased  for  fifty  dollars. 
Riding  or  carriage  horses,  of  a  superior  quality,  cost  about  seventy-five  or  eighty 
dollars.  Breeding  mares  are  profitable  stock  for  every  farmer  to  keep,  as  their  annual 
expense  in  keeping  is  but  trifling :  their  labor  is  always  needed,  and  their  colts,  when 
grown,  find  a  ready  market.  Some  farmers  keep  a  stallion,  and  eight  or  ten  brood 
mares.”  59 


66  New  England  Farmer ,  XV  (1836-37),  p.  249. 

57  4th  Report,  Agriculture  of  Massachusetts  (1841),  p.  304. 
68  New  York  Farmer,  I  (1828),  p.  268. 

59  Peck,  New  Guide  for  Emigrants  (1836),  p.  281. 


Chapter  XVIII. — Crops  and  Tillage. 

The  chief  improvements  in  field  culture  during  this  period  were  better  tillage 
by  improved  implements,  the  conservation  of  soil  fertility  by  increased  use  of 
manures,  and  more  constant  use  of  tilled  land  by  the  elimination  of  summer 
fallows.  There  is  little  evidence  of  the  development  of  systematic  crop  rota¬ 
tions.  Farmers  took  little  account  of  the  effect  of  cropping  systems  on  soil 
fertility ;  they  chose  the  crops  which  they  needed  for  farm  consumption  and 
for  which  there  was  a  market,  and  the  order  in  which  they  shifted  a  crop 
from  one  field  to  another  was  determined  by  tradition,  convenience,  or  chance. 

CROPPING  SYSTEMS. 

Grass  and  corn  were  standard  crops  for  all  eastern  farms  and,  in  most 
districts  outside  southern  New  England,  wheat  as  well.  Oats,  rye,  and  barley 
were  of  minor  importance.  Potatoes  and  other  roots  were  not  largely  grown 
as  field  crops  and  so  had  no  definite  place  in  rotations.  The  cropping  system 
frequently  followed  in  Lancaster  County’,  Pennsylvania,  about  1825,  is 
probably  typical  of  the  better  farming  of  the  East. 

“  The  land  being  rich,  they  crop  hard,  as  will  appear  by  the  following  rotation,  which 
they  frequently  adopt:  1st,  corn;  2d,  barley  or  oats;  3d,  wheat,  with  manure;  4th,  rye; 
5th,  clover  and  timothy.  When  they  are  not  likely  to  have  manure  for  the  barley  or  oat 
stubble,  they  omit  the  barley  or  oat  crop,  and  break  the  corn  ground  for  wheat  before 
harvest.  Then  the  rotation  is  corn,  wheat,  rye,  and  grass  seed.  On  the  above  system, 
not  more  than  one-fifth  of  grass  land  is  broken  annually,  and  as  they  keep  few  cattle, 
and  these  mostly  soiled  in  the  stable  until  after  harvest,  nearly  four-fifths  of  the  whole 
cleared  part  of  the  country  is  left  in  harvestable  crops.”  1 

In  Chester  County  about  this  time  the  “  prevailing  and  most  approved  mode 
of  culture  ”  was  a  six-year  rotation.  First,  corn  followed  by  spring  grain, 
barley,  or  oats.  When  that  crop  was  off,  the  field  was  manured  and  plowed 
the  latter  end  of  August.  It  remained  thus  about  a  month  and  was  then  cross- 
plowed  and  sown  with  wheat  or  rye,  well-harrowed  and  rolled.  Grass  seed, 
timothy  or  orchard  grass  and  clover,  were  sown  on  the  grain,  and  after  the 
grain  was  harvested  the  field  was  kept  as  upland  meadow  or  pasture  for  2 
years,  when  it  was  again  plowed  and  sown  with  corn.2 

CONSERVATION  OF  SOIL  FERTILITY. 

Barnyard  manure  was  available  on  every  farm  in  quantities  proportionate 
to  the  livestock  kept.  As  farms  in  general  became  more  heavily  stocked,  the 
manure  produced  increased  and  applications  were  more  frequent.  In  general, 
fields  were  manured  every  3  or  4  years.  But  the  applications  were  scanty,  and 

1  American  Farmer,  Vll  (1825),  p.  163. 

2  Ibid ,  X  (1828),  p.  65.  For  similar  rotations  used  in  New  York  and  Massachusetts,  see 

N.  Y.  Bd.  Agric.  Memoirs,  II  (1823),  p.  19;  4th  Report,  Agriculture  of  Massa¬ 
chusetts  (1841),  p.  240. 


232 


CROPS  AND  TILLAGE 


233 


owing  to  bad  management  the  manure  lost  much  of  its  fertilizing  qualities, 
hew  farmers  could  afford  the  labor  cost  of  carting  manure,  except  after 
harvest  in  the  fall  or  during  the  winter.  Hence  it  lay  for  months  in  the  barn¬ 
yard  unprotected  from  sun  and  rain,  losing  nitrates  by  fermentation  and 
leaching.3 


SOIL  AMENDMENTS. 

The  use  of  plaster  of  Paris  (gypsum,  sulphate  of  lime)  on  wheat  and  grass 
lands  had  spread  rapidly  in  the  early  decades  of  the  nineteenth  century.  In 
the  neighborhood  of  New  York,  on  western  Long  Island,  and  in  Dutchess  and 
Westchester  Counties  the  introduction  of  gypsum  was  said  to  mark  “  a  new 
era  in  agriculture  and  rural  economy/' 

“  By  this  means,  and  consequent  attention  and  improvements,  the  products  of  the  2d 
or  3d  quality  of  land  have  been  nearly  doubled  within  the  last  io  years;  and  land  of  this 
description  has  risen  in  value  20  to  30  and  40  per  cent.”  4 5 

About  1815  the  supply  of  plaster,  which  up  to  that  time  had  been  received 
chiefly  from  Nova  Scotia,  was  increased  by  the  opening  of  new  quarries  in 
western  New  York  and  on  the  Hudson  River.  The  price,  which  was  normally 
about  $18  a  ton,  had  risen  to  $30  and  $40  during  the  War  of  1812,  but  the  new 
supplies  sold  for  $12  a  ton.6  In  western  New  York  farmers  made  great  use 
of  the  local  supplies  of  gypsum,  hauling  it  30  and  40  miles,  and  in  winter, 
when  the  sleighing  was  good,  70  and  80  miles  from  the  quarries.  Large 
amounts  were  also  shipped  down  the  Susquehanna  for  use  in  eastern  Pennsyl¬ 
vania.  By  1835  the  price  at  the  mills  was  as  low  as  $2  and  $3  a  ton.6  Gypsum 
proved  especially  valuable  on  sandy  and  gravelly  soils,  but  after  a  few  years 
its  benefits  appeared  to  diminish. 

The  use  of  lime,  which  had  been  noted  before  the  Revolution  in  the  valley 
of  the  Susquehanna,  became  general  after  1820.  Limestone,  which  abounds 
in  the  neighborhood,  was  burned  with  anthracite  coal  and  sold  at  local  kilns 
at  10  cents  a  bushel.  A  contributor  to  The  Cultivator  wrote : 7 

“  The  improvement  which  has  been  effected  within  the  last  twenty  years  in  several 
of  the  eastern  counties  of  Pennsylvania,  (and  especially  in  Chester),  is  almost  incredible. 
And  the  whole  is  mainly  attributed  to  a  regular  and  judicious  use  of  lime  as  a 

manure .  Some  idea  may  be  formed  of  the  estimation  in  which  lime  is  held 

here  as  a  manure,  by  the  fact,  that  farmers  come  from  25  to  30  miles,  i.  e.  from 
Maryland  and  the  poor  district  of  primitive  formation  in  the  southern  part  of  Chester 
county,  bordering  on  the  Maryland  line,  to  my  lime-kiln  and  others  in  the  neighborhood : 
the  lime  costing  those  farmers  twenty-five  cents  per  bushel  when  delivered.  To  the 
farmers  in  that  quarter,  lime  is  the  ‘anchor  of  hope’;  there  it  has  already  made  the 
barren  and  desert  place  glad,  and  is  fast  putting  a  new  and  improved  face  upon  the 
country.” 

Another  calcareous  soil  amendment  which  came  into  rather  general  use  in  a 
limited  area  was  the  New  Jersey  marl.  The  benefits  of  marl  were  known 

3  American  Farmer,  VIII  (1826),  p.  122;  X  (1828),  pp.  66,  114;  2d  Report,  Agriculture 

of  Massachusetts  (1838),  p.  80;  4th  Report  (1841),  p.  131. 

4  Spafford,  New  York  Gazetteer  (1813),  p.  18. 

5  Niles  Register,  VIII  (1815),  p.  136. 

6  Ibid.,  VII  (1814-15),  p.  416;  Phila.  Agric.  Soc.  Memoirs,  III  (1814),  p.  268;  The 

Cultivator,  II  (1835-36),  p.  184. 

7  V  (1838-39),  p.  77.  See  also  Maine  Farmer,  IV  (1836),  p.  364. 


234 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


and  application  had  been  made  in  an  experimental  way  as  early  as  1800,  but 
not  until  about  1820  did  its  use  become  a  factor  in  the  farming  of  the  State. 
The  marl  district  extends  across  the  State  in  a  belt  about  10  to  20  miles  wide 
from  Sandy  Hook  to  the  Delaware  River  below  Red  Bank.  We  read  in  The 

Cultivator : 8 

“  This  region  of  country  is  well  calculated  to  be  one  of  the  most  productive  in  the 
State ;  it  abounds  in  marl,  both  the  green  sand  and  calcareous,  or  shell  marl ;  the  former 
is  dug  in  many  places  within  two  feet  of  the  surface,  and  the  latter  generally  about  six 
feet;  the  first  is  sold  at  the  pit  for  31I  cents  a  load  of  20  bushels,  and  the  last  at  50  cents 
per  load.  The  application  to  the  soil  of  both  kinds  is  about  the  same  in  quantity,  ranging 
from  5  to  25  loads  per  acre.  The  greatest  distance  to  which  they  have  hauled  from 
this  neighborhood  is  about  12  miles.  The  general  use  of  marl  here  is  quite  recent,  and 
no  doubt  as  it  becomes  better  known,  the  use  of  it  will  be  greatly  extended . 

Fertilizers  had  for  the  most  part  a  local  use  and  a  local  market.  Guano,  the 
first  imported  fertilizer,  was  already  known,  and  shipments  had  been  received 
in  Boston  as  early  as  1830.9  But  for  the  most  part,  farmers  used  what  was 
available  near  home.  Thus  the  market  gardeners  of  Rhode  Island  used 
quantities  of  rockweed  and  fish,  and  from  Boston  and  New  York  slaughter 
house  offal,  night  soil,  and  stable  manures  were  carted  to  neighboring  towns 
for  use  on  the  fields.  In  New  York  about  1840  a  firm  was  advertising,  under 
the  name  poudrette,  night  soil  in  powdered  form,  disinfected  and  deodorized.10 

GRASS  LAND— HAY  AND  PASTURAGE. 

All  fields  were  regularly  laid  down  to  grass  after  two  or  three  grain  crops 
had  been  taken  off  and  were  then  mowed  or  pastured  for  several  years.  In 
addition,  there  were  permanent  meadows,  usually  low  land  along  the  margins 
of  rivers  and  smaller  streams,  the  so-called  “  bottom  lands  ”  or  “  intervales, 
which  were  never  plowed.  In  the  management  of  grass  land  the  market  influ¬ 
ences  are  clearly  evident.  The  concentration  of  commercial  beef-fattening 
and  dairying  in  a  few  areas  led  to  the  improvement  of  upland  mowing  lands 
by  regular  sowing  of  clover  and  other  grasses,  and  even  permanent  meadows 
were  occasionally  manured  and  plowed;  but  in  the  back  country,  where  com¬ 
mercial  grazing  was  not  profitable,  rough  and  stony  mowing  lands  reverted 
to  pasture,  and  pastures  growing  up  with  weeds  and  bushes  soon  became 
woodland.* 11 

In  Chester  County,  Pennsylvania,  the  prosperity  of  graziers  was  reflected 
in  increased  attention  to  grass  lands.  Here,  we  are  told,  clover  was  sown  as 
regularly  as  wheat.12  About  1820,  during  a  period  of  temporary  failure  in 
the  clover  crop,  orchard  grass  was  introduced.  The  sowing  of  lucerne  (alfalfa) 
did  not  progress  beyond  the  experimental  stage.  Oxen  were  fattened  in  this 
country  in  part  on  permanent  meadows,  “  well  set  with  natural  grasses,”  at 
the  rate  of  from  30  to  50  animals  to  100  acres.13  Cattle  were  also  grazed  on 

8  III  (1836-37),  p.  179.  See  also  Rogers,  Geology  of  New  Jersey,  1st  Report  (1836), 

p.  46.  A  map  showing  the  marl  region  is  given  in  Rogers’s  2d  Report  (1840). 

9  New  England  Farmer,  IX  (1830-31),  pp.  54,  I29* 

10  The  Cultivator,  VI  (183&-39),  p.  144-  .  .  n  .  . 

11  N.  H.  State  Bd.  Agric.,  Agricultural  Repository,  I  (1822),  p.  49;  Massachusetts  Board 

of  Agric.,  1st  Annual  Report  (1853),  pt.  I,  p.  69;  New  England  Farmer,  XVII 

(1838-39),  P-  u4-r  ,  0 

12  American  Farmer,  X  (1828),  p.  65. 

13  Loc.  cit. 


CROPS  AND  TILLAGE 


235 


sown  uplands,  for  the  high  cost  of  farm  labor  had  stimulated  farmers  to  give 
up  grain  crops  and  lay  down  many  of  their  fields  to  grass.  A  contemporary 
observer  described  the  management  of  such  pastures  in  Chester  and  Delaware 
counties  as  follows  : 14 

“  I  observed,  in  many  parts  of  Chester  and  Delaware  counties,  the  farmers  followed 
grazing  either  for  beef  or  butter.  They  manure  and  lime  their  land  highly,  until  it  is 
sufficiently  strong  to  produce  a  good  crop  of  smooth  stalkmeadow-grass,  green  grass 
( Poa  pratensis),  and  white  clover,  with  which  the  land  is  soon  covered.  As  the  red 
clover  fails  with  which  the  land  is  laid  down  after  mellowing  crops,  this  sward  of  white 
clover  and  green  grass  they  carefully  preserve,  without  ploughing,  for  many  years ; 
and  in  order  to  prevent  its  running  out  or  becoming  hide-bound,  as  the  graziers  term  it, 
they  sometimes  scarify  the  sod  and  manure  on  the  surface  in  the  winter.  But  if  they 
are  obliged  to  renew  the  grass  by  ploughing,  they  give  the  land  a  good  coat  of  manure 
and  plough  it  about  four  or  five  inches  deep,  and  turn  the  sward  very  neatly;  immediately 
sow  it  down  with  wheat,  which  never  fails  to  produce  a  good  crop ;  the  native  grass 
comes  up  through  the  seams,  and  is  much  more  vigorous.  But  the  graziers  plough  as 
little  as  possible,  esteeming  a  good  crop  of  grass  more  profitable  than  grain;  when  the 
cost  of  cultivating  grain  crops  is  counted ;  and  when  land  is  got  into  this  state,  it  fre¬ 
quently  rents  for  eight  dollars  per  acre.  By  adopting  a  regular  system  of  grazing,  few 
hands  are  required;  the  land  always  looks  handsomely,  while  it  makes  the  owner  and 
the  land  rich  together.  The  grazier  calculates  that  one  acre  of  good  rich  native  grass 
will  make  a  thrifty  steer  fat  in  four  or  five  months,  which  adds  to  his  value  one  half, — 
say  he  costs  twenty  dollars,  when  fat  is  forth  forty.” 

In  the  Connecticut  Valley  much  of  the  hay  crop  was  cut  on  permanent 
meadows  on  the  bottom  lands  or  intervales,  where  the  annual  overflowing  of 
the  rivers  caused  native  grasses  to  yield  large  crops  without  ever  plowing. 
The  famous  Deerfield  Meadows,  a  tract  of  about  3,000  acres,  were  mowed 
two  or  three  times  a  year,  yielding  about  3  tons  to  the  acre.15  In  the  hill 
towns  of  this  region,  clover,  timothy,  and  red  top  were  sown  at  the  rate  of 
3  pecks  of  the  first,  1  of  the  second,  and  from  4  to  6  pounds  of  clover  seed. 
The  land  was  laid  down  with  wheat,  rye,  or  oats,  and  the  grass  seed  sown 
with  the  grain.  The  first  year,  when  the  clover  predominated,  the  average 
yield  was  from  2  to  3  tons,  decreasing  to  little  over  a  ton  an  acre  after  the 
second  year.16 

In  Maine,  farmers  sowed  clover  about  once  in  8  years,  but  few  sowed  other 
grasses.  Consequently,  hay  was  a  variable  crop  and  farmers  were  at  times 
forced  to  dispose  of  their  stock  at  a  sacrifice  for  lack  of  winter  fodder.17 

GROWTH  OF  MARKETS  FOR  HAY  IN  CITIES. 

The  consumption  of  hay  by  horses  at  livery  and  private  stables  in  towns 
and  cities  gave  farmers  in  their  vicinity  a  rapidly  increasing  market.  A  single 
farmer  in  1837  was  sending  between  300  and  400  tons  of  pressed  hay  to  the 
New  York  market.18  From  Essex  County,  Massachusetts,  in  the  same  year, 
1,035  tons  of  hay  (including  some  straw)  were  sold  to  Boston,19  and  in 
addition  about  a  thousand  stage  and  livery  horses  in  the  county  were  supplied. 

14  American  Farmer,  VII  (1825),  p.  163. 

15  Report,  Agriculture  of  Massachusetts  (1841),  pp.  4,  7. 

18  Ibid.,  5,  6. 

17  Putnam,  Touches  on  Agriculture,  ch.  II,  p.  24. 

18  The  Cultivator,  IV  (1837-38),  p.  12. 

19 1st  Report,  Agriculture  of  Massachusetts  (1837),  p.  17. 


236  AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 

The  hay  from  Ipswich  had  a  high  reputation  and  great  pains  were  taken  in 
curing  it.  Many  farmers  in  Middlesex  County  were  increasing  their  hay  crop 
in  the  years  1830  to  1840.  Hay  was  selling  in  Essex  at  this  time  at  from 
$12  to  $28  per  ton ;  a  fair  average  price  was  $16.  Middlesex  farmers  received 
about  $15  and  figured  $2.50  as  the  cost  of  harvesting  plus  $2.50  for  market¬ 
ing.  Assuming  an  average  yield  of  1^  tons,  the  farmer  would  net  $15  Per 
acre  for  the  crop.20 


WHEAT— IN  NEW  ENGLAND. 

Of  all  the  crops  grown  in  the  north,  wheat  was  most  susceptible  to  changing 
economic  conditions.  Its  high  specific  value  and  its  good  keeping  qualities 
made  transportation  possible  even  under  primitive  conditions,  and  in  the  com¬ 
mercial  towns  there  was  a  constant  market  for  wheat  flour.  Consequently, 
we  found  that  in  colonial  days  wheat  was  a  commercial  product  and  that  the 
areas  of  wheat-growing  were  shifting  so  as  to  concentrate  pioduction  on  the 
best  land.  In  New  England,  the  Connecticut  Valley  21  was  noted  for  its  wheat 
before  1700  and  supplied  other  sections  with  wheat  and  flour.  But  early 
in  the  eighteenth  century  the  port  towns  of  New  England  were  getting  bread- 
stuffs,  principally  wheat,  from  the  Middle  and  Southern  colonies,  and  the 
wheat  areas  of  New  England  had  shifted  to  newer  soils  in  northern  Vermont 
and  the  Berkshires.  Elsewhere  in  New  England  wheat  was  generally  regarded 
as  a  failure.  Many  causes  were  assigned,  the  climate,  the  rust,  etc.,  but  the 
plain  truth  was  revealed  to  only  a  few.  Among  these  was  John  Adams,  who 

wrote : 22 

“Notwithstanding  all  this  [i.  e.  failure  of  Siberian  wheat],  I  have  no  doubt  that 
wheat  may  be  raised  in  Massachusetts  as  well  as  anywhere  else,  but  the  land  must  be 
under  proper  cultivation,  particularly  manured  abundantly— the  seed  sowed  so  early 
that  it  may  be  forward  and  vigorous  enough  to  bear  the  winter,  and  start  early  enough 
in  the  spring  to  shoot  the  grain  and  ear  forward  before  the  season  of  insects.  But  this 
process  which  I  know  has  succeeded  and  will  succeed,  is  expensive,  and  the  wheat  will 
not  procure  a  price  equal  to  the  labor.  What  is  the  reason  of  this?  Here  lies  the 

mystery.  No  Russian  seed  will  retrieve  this .  . 

“  You  will  never  get  Siberian  wheat  or  any  other  wheat  to  grow  in  New-England  in 
quantities  to  constitute  a  steady  staple,  without  an  expensive  cultivation,  and  that 
expense  will  never  be  repaid  while  wheat,  rye,  and  corn  have  such  a  formidable  rival 
in  commerce.” 

At  this  time  it  was  estimated  that  90,000  persons  in  Massachusetts  sub¬ 
sisted  on  imported  flour,  requiring,  at  the  rate  of  a  pound  a  day,  between 
13,000  and  14,000  barrels  a  month.23 

•  Between  1800  and  1820  wheat-growing  developed  on  new  soils  in  Maine  and 
was  still  produced  for  market  in  western  Vermont.  Whipple 24  wrote  of 
Maine  in  1816 : 

“In  favorable  seasons  wheat  is  more  profitably  cultivated  than  corn— Twenty  years 
since,  very  few  people  supposed  that  wheat  would  ever  be  cultivated  to  advantage  in 

20  4th  Report,  Agriculture  of  Massachusetts  (1841),  p.  237. 

22  Letter ^of  August  11,  1812,  to  Elkanah  Watson,  in  Watson,  Men  and  Times  of  the 

Revolution,  379.  .  ,  /x  ., 

23  Letter  of  Thomas  Jefferson  to  Levi  Lincoln,  August  22,  1808,  in  Works  (Library  ed., 

1904),  XII,  145- 

24  Geographical  and  Statistical  l  tew,  15. 


CROPS  AND  TILLAGE 


237 


Maine— since  that  time,  it  has  been  ascertained  that  the  soil  between  the  Penobscot  and 
Kennebec  rivers,  is  peculiarly  adapted  to  this  article;  and  is  found  to  be  more  profitable 
than  any  other  grain.” 

Vermont  wheat  in  1820  was  marketed  at  Troy  on  the  Hudson  River.25 

EFFECTS  OF  WESTERN  COMPETITION. 

By  1830  the  influence  of  cheap  transportation  via  the  Erie  Canal  was 
apparent,  and  by  1840  flour  of  western  wheat  was  being  used  everywhere  in 
New  England  by  farmers  as  well  as  city  folk.  Flour  prices  had  suffered  a 
marked  decline  since  the  opening  of  the  century.  In  the  years  of  active  for¬ 
eign  demand,  prices  had  been  high,  averaging  $9.44  per  barrel  in  1800  to 
1807  and  $10.07  in  1808  to  1814.  The  decline  in  export  trade  brought  the 
average  for  the  succeeding  11  years  (1815  to  1825)  down  to  $7.82.  The  effects 


of  the  opening  of  the  Erie  Canal  are  seen  in  a  drop  of  the  average  price  for 
the  next  period  of  11  years  (1825  to  1835)  to  $5.90.  In  1836  and  1837  poor 
harvests  forced  up  the  price  temporarily,  raising  the  average  for  the  5  years 
1835-1839  to  $8.26  A  comparison  of  the  trend  of  flour  prices  and  general 
prices  is  shown  in  figure  31. 

A  historian  of  Berkshire  County  27  recorded  in  1829: 

“  The  cultivation  of  wheat  and  rye  has  been  gradually  diminishing  for  years,  and  has 
been  considerably  reduced  since  the  opening  of  the  Western  Canal.  Of  rye,  a  sufficient 
quantity  is  raised  for  the  use  of  the  inhabitants  in  the  middle  and  western  part  of  the 
County,  but  not  enough  to  supply  the  eastern  and  higher  part,  where  the  grains  are  not 
easily  cultivated. 

“  Of  wheat,  considerable  quantities  were  formerly  carried  to  the  market  towns  along 
the  Hudson  River,  as  Hudson,  Kinderhook,  Albany,  and  Troy;  but  for  several  years 
much  more  wheat  flour  has  been  introduced  into  the  County  than  has  been  carried 
out  of  it.” 


25  Mass.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  2d  Series,  IX,  138. 

26  Average  annual  export  prices  at  New  York,  from  Klippart,  The  Wheat  Plant,  328. 

The  prices  by  years  will  be  found  in  table  72,  p.  499. 

27  Field,  Berkshire  County,  Massachusetts,  87. 


238  AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 

In  Vermont  it  was  stated  that  in  a  single  town  (Windsor)  $9,500  was  paid 
every  year  for  western  flour. 

“A  few  years  ago  Vermont  raised  a  surplus  of  wheat,  for  which  she  found  a  ready 
market.  It  is  now  the  reverse ;  and  intelligent  men  think  the  amount  paid  by  our  farmers 
for  the  article  of  flour  the  last  year,  exceeds  what  they  have  received  for  their  wool, 

by  many  thousand  of  dollars.”  28 

In  Maine,  in  1837,  farmers  100  miles  inland  were  eating  bread  made  of 
Rochester  flour.29  A  legislative  committee  which  investigated  wheat  produc¬ 
tion  and  consumption  in  Massachusetts  reported  that  in  1830  only  16,073 
bushels  were  produced  in  the  entire  State  and  that  the  imports  of  flour  into 
the  port  of  Boston  for  consumption  in  Massachusetts  and  in  northern  New 
England  in  the  years  1830  to  1837  averaged  389,000  barrels.  In  addition, 
flour  was  regularly  brought  into  other  smaller  ports  and  there  was 

“  an  almost  perpetual  transportation  by  means  of  wagons,  from  Troy,  Albany,  and 
Hudson,  into  the  county  of  Berkshire,  for  the  supply  not  only  of  the  inhabitants  of  that 
county,  but  for  consumption  by  the  people  of  many  towns  in  the  counties  of  r  rank  in, 
Hampshire,  and  Hampden.”  30 

Notwithstanding  the  facts  which  were  thus  revealed  and  the  well-known 
disinclination  of  farmers  to  raise  wheat,  the  legislatures  of  Massachusetts 
and  Maine  attempted  to  stem  the  tide  of  western  flour  by  paying  bounties  to 
native  wheat-growers.  The  failure  of  the  experiment  should  have  been  evi¬ 
dent  from  the  beginning.  Wheat  production  was  slightly  increased  as  long  as 
the  bounty  was  paid,  but  no  permanent  gains  were  secured.31 

ENEMIES  OF  THE  WHEAT  CROP. 

A  part  of  the  discouragement  of  Eastern  farmers  in  respect  to  wheat-raising 
was  owing  to  the  ravages  of  crop  enemies.  The  rust  was  prevalent  through¬ 
out  the  section,  and  the  Hessian  fly,  which  had  first  appeared  during  the  Revo¬ 
lutionary  War,  had  spread  rapidly.  In  Bucks  County,  Pennsylvania,  in  1823, 
so  much  of  the  wheat  was  destroyed  that  farmers  were  considering  the 
abandonment  of  the  crop.  Wrote  a  farmer  of  that  county  to  the  Pennsylvania 
Agricultural  Society : 33 

“  It  must  be  conceded  that  in  many  districts,  its  cultivation  has  for  some  time,  been 
an  unprofitable  part  of  husbandry ;  and  the  present  season  has  shown,  that  a  failure  has 
taken  place  to  an  alarming  extent,  throughout  a  great  portion  of  our  wheat  country. 
It  appears  that  in  some  places,  where  the  fly  had  been  scarcely  known,  the  crops  are 
now  nearly  destroyed:  and  from  almost  every  quarter,  we  have  accounts  of  the  most 
distressing  kind.” 

A  new  enemy,  the  grain  worm  or  midge,34  crossed  the  border  from  Lower 
Canada  between  1825  and  1830  to  northern  New  York  and  Vermont.  It  was 
described  as  a  fly  with  orange-colored  body  and  white  wings,  which  deposited 
its  eggs  in  the  ears  of  the  wheat.  When  the  young  were  hatched  they  fed  on 

28  Windsor,  Vermont,  Republican,  quoted  in  New  York  Farmer,  VII  (1834),  p.  91. 

29  Maine  Farmer,  V  (1837),  p.  44- 

30  Mass.  House  of  Representatives,  Documents  (1838),  No.  12,  p.  6. 

31  See  p.  193. 

32  Described  on  p.  93. 

33  Memoirs,  I  (1824),  p.  165. 

34  Cecidomyia  tritici. 


CROPS  AND  TILLAGE 


239 


the  grain.  Progressing  at  the  rate  of  from  40  to  60  miles  a  year,  it  had  by 
1840  spread  over  all  of  New  England  and  large  parts  of  New  York  State, 
being  found  as  far  east  as  Maine,  as  far  south  as  Dutchess  County  (New 
York),  and  as  far  west  as  the  Genesee  Valley.35 

Jesse  Buel  wrote: 36 

“It  is  believed  [that  the  grain  worm]  has  diminished  the  product  of  the  wheat  crop, 

in  the  districts  which  it  has  ravaged  for  two  or  three  years,  at  least  three-fourths- _ 

that  is  to  say,  it  has  prevented  the  sowing  of  the  winter  varieties  to  a  very  great  extent, 
and  it  has  destroyed,  at  a  fair  computation,  one-half  of  the  crop  which  has  been  sown. 
Most  of  the  wheat  now  grown  in  these  districts  is  of  the  spring  varieties,  and  these," 
unless  sown  late,  fare  very  little  better  than  the  winter  kinds.” 

INTRODUCTION  OF  NEW  VARIETIES.  ' 

It  had  been  discovered  that  late-sown  winter  wheat  escaped  damage  by  the 
Hessian  fly,  but  on  the  other  hand,  late  maturity  made  the  crop  peculiarly 
liable  to  attacks  of  the  rust  and  the  grain  worm.  As  the  result  of  the  endeavor 
to  find  a  variety  which  could  be  sown  late  and  yet  would  mature  early,  the 
so-called  Mediterranean  wheat  was  introduced.  It  was  a  bearded  red  winter 
wheat  brought  in  1819  from  islands  in  the  Mediterranean  Sea.37 

Spring  wheat  was  coming  into  more  general  use  in  place  of  winter  wheat  in 
northern  New  England  and  New  York,  where  the  crop  if  sown  in  the  fall 
was  apt  to  suffer  severe  losses  from  winter  killing.  Although  not  attacked 
by  the  Hessian  fly,  spring  wheat  suffered  from  both  rust  and  the  grain  worm. 
In  milling  flour  for  export,  spring  wheat  was  not  highly  regarded,  although 
it  was  mixed  sometimes  with  winter  grain. 

One  bushel  of  this  kind  of  wheat  is  generally  sufficient  to  impart  a  dark  shade  to 
the  flour  made  from  five  bushels  of  the  best  grain.  It  is  only  proper  for  flour  of  second 
qualit> ,  and  fine  and  common  middlings — and  it  would  be  well  if  our  wheat  dealers 
would  keep  such  wheat  separate  from  good  winter  grain,  and  send  it  to  market  to  be 
sold  by  its  proper  title.  This  wheat  does  not  possess  the  oleaginous  properties  in  equal 
portion  with  winter  grain.”  38 

New  varieties  of  spring  wheat  introduced  before  1840  were  the  Siberian 
(bearded),  Egyptian  or  many-spiked,  the  Black  Sea,  and  the  Italian.39  Of 
these,  the  Black  Sea  variety,  on  account  of  its  high  yields  and  early  maturity, 
was  perhaps  the  most  valuable. 


WHEAT  YIELDS. 


The  average  yield  of  wheat  in  New  England  in  1840  was  estimated  by 
Colman  at  not  over  12  bushels  per  acre.40  The  statistics  presented  in  connec¬ 
tion  with  claims  for  the  State  bounty  in  1838  41  showed  the  average  yields  in 
the  most  productive  areas  in  Massachusetts  to  be  about  1 5  bushels  per  acre.  In 


HV?e  Cultivator>  V  (1838-39),  p.  27;  N.  Y.  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions ,  III  (1843),  p  146 
30  The  Cultivator,  IV  (1837-38),  2d  ed.,  p.  189.  y  4 

37  Hunt,  Cereals  in  America,  63;  Klippart,  Wheat  Plant,  87,  gives  a  different  story  of  its 
origin. 

N.  Y.  Soc.  for  Promotion  of  Useful  Arts,  Transactions,  IV  (1819),  pt.  II  p  39 
"The  Cultivator,  IV  (1837-38),  pp.  no,  174;  Mass.  Senate,  Document  No.  77  (1838)  ; 
N.  Y.  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions,  I  (1841),  p.  360. 

40  Agricultural  Addresses,  27. 

41  3d  Report,  Agriculture  of  Massachusetts  (1840),  pp.  48,  51. 


240 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


Lancaster  County,  which  had  the  reputation  of  having  the  best  wheat  crop 
in  Pennsylvania,  an  estimate  of  1820  put  the  average  at  15  bushels,  although 
many  farmers  got  from  20  to  30  and  some  30  to  40  bushels.42  In  Chester 
County,  Pennsylvania,  the  average  wheat  crop  was  from  12  to  15  bushels.43 
In  the  interior  of  New  York,  according  to  the  New  York  Farmer ,44  20  to  25 
bushels  was  an  average  wheat  crop. 


CORN. 

Corn,  like  hay,  continued  a  general  crop  without  marked  regional  concentra¬ 
tion  Unlike  wheat,  corn  was  not  attacked  by  destructive  crop  enemies,  and 
although  some  localities  were  better  adapted  than  others  for  its  cultivation, 
yet  the  differences  were  not  so  marked  as  to  lead  to  the  abandonment  of  the 
crop  anywhere.  However,  in  New  England,  corn  production  did  not  keep  pace 
with  increased  consumption,  and  the  deficit  was  supplied  by  importation,  prin¬ 
cipally  from  the  Southern  States.  Pitkin  45  (1835)  estimated  the  amount  of 
Indian  corn  consumed  in  New  England  which  was  brought  from  other  parts  of 
the  Union  at  between  2.000.000  and  3,000,000  bushels  a  year.  Corn  from  west¬ 
ern  New  York  and  from  the  Ohio  Valley  did  not  figure  in  eastern  markets  in  its 
original  form,  having  too  little  value  to  stand  transportation  costs.  Western 
corn  nevertheless  competed  with  the  eastern  product  when  condensed  into  pork, 
and  in  this  form  the  competition  was  serious.46 

The  chief  change  in  tillage  methods  was  the  use  of  the  cultivator  instead  of 
hand  hoeing,  to  which  reference  has  already  been  made.  Many  farmers  still 
“  topped  ”  their  corn  for  fodder  and  removed  the  blades,  also,  before  the  ears 
were  ripe,  thus  considerably  decreasing  the  yield.  The  southern  and  western 
practice  of  feeding  from  the  stack  in  the  field  was  advocated,  but  I  have  found 

no  evidence  of  its  adoption  in  the  East. 

Progress  was  made  in  the  development  of  new  varieties  of  corn  through 
seed  selection,  chiefly  for  the  purpose  of  obtaining  early  maturity  and  conse¬ 
quent  immunity  from  frost  in  the  high  country  and  in  northern  New  England. 
The  Dutton  corn,  a  variety  combining  large  yield  with  early  maturity,  was 
well  known  in  Vermont.  A  list  and  description  of  40  recognized  varieties  was 
published  by  Jesse  Buel  in  183s.4' 


MINOR  GRAINS. 


Of  the  minor  grains,  rye  and  barley  seem  to  have  been  most  important. 
Rye  bread  was  still  eaten  by  farmers  remote  from  markets.  A  tolerable  crop 
of  rye  could  be  raised  by  even  a  negligent  farmer  on  poor  land  and  the  dis¬ 
tilleries  furnished  a  ready  market.  In  four  towns  near  Springfield,  Massachu¬ 
setts,  in  the  Connecticut  Valley,  according  to  an  estimate  of  1826,  more  than 
100,000  bushels  of  rye,  besides  large  quantities  of  corn,  were  annually  dis- 


42  American  Farmer ,  II  (1820-21),  p.  137. 

43  Ibid.,  X  (1828),  p.  65. 

43  ^Commerce  of  3 United  States,  p.  525.  See  also  New  England  Farmer,  XV 
p.  57;  Colman,  Agricultural  Addresses,  37. 


43  See  p.  230. 

47  The  Cultivator,  V  (1838-39),  p.  43- 


(1836-37), 


CROPS  AND  TILLAGE  241 

tilled,43  and  approximately  the  same  amounts  were  used  in  the  distilleries  near 
New  York  City.49  Barley  was  used  to  some  extent  for  feeding  stock,  especially 
horses,  and  when  wheat  was  scarce  barley  flour  was  used  for  bread,  but  when 
raised  for  sale  the  principal  markets  were  the  breweries.  Chester  County, 
Pennsylvania,  and  Rhode  Island  were  noted  for  barley  production  before 
1820, 60  but  the  chief  area  of  production  was  in  the  neighborhood  of  Herkimer 
County,  in  New  York  State.  The  New  York  Farmer 61  boasted: 

Two-thirds  of  all  the  barley  grown  in  the  United  States  is  believed  to  be  marketed 
at  Albany  and  the  neighboring  towns  upon  the  Hudson.  The  amount  brought  to  our 
market  last  year  is  estimated  at  450,000  bushels.  It  is  of  two  kinds — two  rowed  and 
six  rowed,  one  possessing  a  thin  and  the  other  a  thick  skin,  and  larger  berry,  ill  adapted 
to  be  malted  together,  as  one  kind  malts  quicker  than  the  other,  and  becomes  sensibly 
deteriorated  before  the  saccharine  matter  of  the  other  kind  is  fully  developed.  The  two 
varieties  are  often  mixed  by  the  grower ;  but  that  which  passes  through  second  hands, 
as  the  merchant,  boatmen,  &c.  is  almost  universally  so,  and  is  besides  frequently  adulter¬ 
ated  with  oats  and  other  foreign  matters,  which  seriously  depreciate  its  value.  It  is 
stated  that  the  deterioration  and  loss  consequent  upon  the  bad  condition  of  the  barley 
brought  to  market  the  last  season,  was  equal  to  ten  per  cent,  or  45,000  bushels — which, 
expressed  in  money,  at  75  cents  the  bushel,  amounts  to  $33,750.” 

Oats  were  often  sown  when  laying  land  down  to  grass.  They  were  used  as 
fodder  for  fattening  cattle  when  mixed  with  peas.  The  demand  from  livery 
stables  stimulated  cultivation  in  the  neighborhood  of  cities.  Only  in  a  few 
sections  were  oats  used  for  human  consumption.52  Buckwheat  was  not  highly 
regarded.  It  had  the  reputation  of  being  a  poor  grain,  to  be  cultivated  by  the 
indolent  and  slovenly.  Its  value  in  driving  out  weeds  was  recognized,  how¬ 
ever,  and  progressive  farmers  occasionally  turned  it  under  as  a  green  manure.53 

POTATOES  AND  OTHER  ROOT  CROPS. 

The  benefits  of  raising  root  crops,  potatoes,  turnips,  carrots,  mangel-wurt- 
zel,  and  ruta  baga,  for  fodder  were  strongly  emphasized  by  agricultural  socie¬ 
ties  and  by  farm  papers,  but  their  exhortations  fell  for  the  most  part  on  deaf 
ears.  Potatoes  were  more  generally  cultivated  after  1820,  better  seed  was  used 
and  larger  crops  were  harvested,  but  except  in  a  few  localities  they  were  not 
fed  to  stock.  In  eastern  Massachusetts  and  Rhode  Island,  and  in  Maine,  pota¬ 
toes  were  raised  in  considerable  quantities  for  market.  Maine  potatoes  in  1840 
had  already  achieved  a  high  reputation  and  were  being  sold  in  the  Southern 
States.54  The  more  general  cultivation  of  roots  for  fodder  was  prevented  by 
high  labor  costs,  particularly  at  harvesting.  A  contributor  to  the  Memoirs  55 
of  the  New  York  Board  of  Agriculture  from  Onondaga  County  discussed 
the  objections  to  raising  turnips  on  a  typical  150-acre  farm,  whose  labor  force 
comprised  only  two  men : 

“  Suppose,  then,  that  the  turnip  husbandry  were  introduced,  and  that  from  six  to  ten 
acres  of  turnips  were  annually  cultivated  on  every  man’s  farm ;  where  could  sufficient 

48  Hampshire  Gazette,  quoted  in  New  England  Fanner,  V  (1826-27),  p.  159. 

49  Genesee  Farmer,  quoted  in  Maine  Farmer,  V  (1837),  P-  6 7. 

50  Phila.  Agric.  Soc.  Memoirs,  IV  (1818),  p.  xxxii. 

61  VII  (1834),  p.  144. 

52  2d  Report,  Agriculture  of  Massachusetts  (1838),  p.  27;  4th  Report  (1841),  pp.  23,  213. 

The  Cultivator,  IV  (1837-38),  174. 

53  American  Farmer,  X  (1828),  p.  114. 

54  The  Cultivator,  V  (1838-39),  p.  187;  Maine  Farmer,  V  (1837),  p.  44. 

55  III  (1826),  p.  92. 


1 7 


242 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


help  be  obtained  for  harvesting  and  securing  these  crops?  The  turnip  harvest  comes 
at  a  season  of  the  year  which,  in  this  county,  is  generally  very  unpleasant-the  days 
short  and  much  of  the  weather  stormy.  Frequently,  the  farmers  here  find  it  more 
than  enough  to  harvest  their  corn,  make  their  cider,  and  attend  to  their  numerous  other 
concerns,  which  are  indispensable.  If,  in  addition  to  their  present  stock  of  autumna 
business,  they  had  large  crops  of  turnips  to  pull  and  secure,  scenes  of  distress  would 

necessarily  ensue.” 


In  addition,  he  pointed  out  that  turnips  were  a  precarious  crop,  exposed 
to  damage  by  the  fly,  grasshoppers,  and  by  drought.  The  labor  cost  of  feeding, 
too,  was  greater  than  the  cost  of  feeding  hay.  Experiments  with  the  new 
roots,  mangel-wurtzel  and  ruta  baga,  had  begun  early  in  the  century,  but  until 
about  1830  their  cultivation  was  still  limited  to  gentlemen  farmers.  Within 
a  few  years  of  the  close  of  our  period  a  more  general  interest  in  these  crops 


was  developing.56 


MARKET  GARDENING. 

Specialized  areas  of  market  gardening  and  fruit  growing  had  developed 
rapidly  between  1820  and  1840  in  eastern  Masachussetts,  particularly  Essex 
and  Middlesex  Counties,  in  Rhode  Island  in  towns  along  Narragansett  Bay, 
and  in  the  neighborhood  of  New  York  on  Long  Island  and  in  New  Jersey. 
In  these  districts  was  found  the  most  intensive  farming  in  the  whole  country. 
Hired  labor  was  regularly  used ;  manures  were  liberally  applied,  both  those 
made  on  the  farm  and  stable  manure  brought  from  the  cities.  Land  was  re¬ 
claimed,  meadows  drained,  and  dry  lands  irrigated,  and  tillage  was  more 
like  garden  culture  than  field  culture.57  The  efforts  of  farmers  in  these  sections 
were  not  limited  to  supplying  local  markets ;  for  some  vegetables,  notably 
onions  and  beets,  markets  were  found  in  the  West  Indies  and  in  the  Southern 

States.58 

The  profits  of  market  gardening  led  to  high  land  values  in  these  sections, 
and  as  a  result  less  intensive  types  of  agriculture  were  displaced  and  forced 
back  onto  cheaper  land.  In  1836  the  better  class  of  farms  in  Dutchess  County, 
near  New  York,  were  selling  for  $100  per  acre,  four  times  their  price  in 
1800;  a  few  years  later  land  just  outside  of  Philadelphia  brought  $150  per 
acre.59  In  West  Cambridge,  Massachusetts,  land  devoted  to  garden  truck  for 
the  Boston  market  increased  in  value  in  the  10  years  1830  to  1840  from  $37 
to  $300  per  acre.60  High  land  values  in  connection  with  ready  markets  pro¬ 
duced  tenancy  near  the  large  cities,  a  condition  of  land  tenure  almost  unknown 
elsewhere  in  the  North.  Many  of  the  truck  farms  were  leased  by  immigrants, 
who  had  learned  gardening  in  Europe.  After  a  few  years  they  were  usually 
able  to  purchase  their  farms.61 

56  The  Cultivator,  IV  (1837-38),  p.  79',  Maine  Farmer,  V  (1837),  p.  275. 

57  Descriptions  of  successful  farming  in  Middlesex  County,  Massachusetts,  with  details 

of  crops  and  sales  are  given  in  4th  Report,  Agriculture  of  Massachusetts  (1841),  PP* 
400  et  seq.  For  market  gardening  in  Rhode  Island,  see  Jackson,  Geological  ana 
Agricultural  Survey  (1839),  PP-  13^>,  J48,  I53>  I55»  16 7, 

58  New  England  Farmer,  XV  (i836-37),P-  441  1st  Report,  Agriculture  of  Massachusetts, 

(1838),  p.  35;  4th  Report  (1841),  p.  222. 

59  The  Cultivator,  III  (1836-37),  p.  41.  New  York  Farmer,  VI  (1833),  p.  37°. 

G0  4th  Report,  Agriculture  of  Massachusetts  (1841),  p.  354- 

61  New  York  Farmer,  I  (1828),  p.  231. 


CROPS  AND  TILLAGE 


243 


ORCHARDS  AND  VINEYARDS. 

Apples  remained  the  most  important  orchard  fruit  everywhere,  except  in 
some  districts  in  the  Middle  Atlantic  States,  as  in  New  Jersey,  where  peaches 
were  raised  on  a  considerable  scale.  The  production  of  cider  had  long  been  the 
chief  means  of  utilizing  apples,  and  but  little  attention  was  paid  to  the  develop¬ 
ment  of  varieties,  or  to  the  pruning  and  care  of  orchards.  The  trees  were 
described  as  “  bristled  all  over,  from  root  to  top,  with  branches  like  whip 
sticks;  hide  bound,  cankered  and  covered  with  moss.”  62  About  the  year  1830 
a  vigorous  temperance  reform  swept  over  the  Northern  States,  causing  a 
marked  decline  in  cider  drinking.  Many  farmers  cut  down  their  apple  trees 
and  all  neglected  them.  But  in  a  few  years  new  uses  for  apples  were  discov¬ 
ered.  They  were  found  valuable  to  feed  to  hogs,  horses,  and  cattle,  and  the 
growth  of  urban  population  created  a  demand  for  better  apples  for  table  use 
and  for  cooking.  On  farms  near  enough  to  send  apples  to  market,  therefore, 
there  was  a  renewed  interest  in  apple  growing,  and  new  varieties  were  planted 
and  engrafted.63 

The  beginnings  of  commercial  grape  culture  are  found  between  the  years 
1780  and  1820,  when  vineyards  were  planted  near  New  York  and  Philadel¬ 
phia,  in  York  County,  Pennsylvania,  at  Cincinnati,  Ohio,  Lexington  and 
Glasgow,  Kentucky,  and  Vevay,  Indiana,  where  30  Swiss  families  had  settled 
in  1804  on  land  particularly  granted  for  the  encouragement  of  vine  cultivation. 
For  the  most  part  the  vineyards  were  small,  from  1  to  5  acres,  and  were 
invariably  planted  with  foreign  grapes,  which  proved  unsuited  to  American 
conditions.  The  vines  were  either  destroyed  by  various  crop  enemies  or  else 
did  not  flourish,  even  with  the  greatest  care.  About  1820  experiments  began 
with  native  varieties,  resulting  in  the  development  of  the  now  famous  Catawba 
grapes.  A  large  emigration  into  the  valley  of  the  Ohio  of  Germans  from  the 
Rhine,  beginning  about  1820,  brought  many  practiced  vine  dressers  and 
assisted  in  the  establishment  there  of  commercial  wine  production.64 

SPECIAL  CROPS— HOPS. 

The  pressure  of  western  competition  on  staples  such  as  wheat  and  pork 
caused  eastern  farmers,  particularly  in  New  England,  to  give  attention  to  a 
number  of  special  crops  in  an  attempt  to  find  commodities  which  could  be 
profitably  marketed  under  the  new  competitive  conditions.  Except  in  the  case 
of  tobacco,  all  of  the  special  crops  proved  in  the  end  to  be  more  cheaply  raised 
in  the  West  and  their  production  in  the  East  had  begun  to  decline  by  1840 
or  1850.  The  growing  of  hops  for  market  had  become  localized  in  10  or  12 
towns  in  the  northwest  corner  of  Middlesex  County,  Massachusetts,  as  early 
as  1780,  and  by  1811  their  annual  production  was  over  100,000  pounds.65  A 
considerable  part  of  the  crop  was  exported  to  France  and  Germany,  and  in 

62  American  Farmer,  II  (1820-21),  p.  170. 

63  N.  Y.  Bd.  Agric.,  Memoirs,  II  (1823),  p.  75,  4th  Report,  Agriculture  of  Massachusetts 

(1841),  p.  384;  Conn.  State  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions,  1855,  p.  186. 

,;4  American  Farmer,  V  (1823),  p.  251;  VIII  (1826),  pp.  164,  284;  New  York  Farmer,  II 

(1829),  pp.  94,  1 14 ;  III  (1830),  pp.  212,  221  ;  VII  (1834),  P-  131;  Ohio  State  Board 

Agriculture,  14th  Annual  Report  (1859),  p.  465;  Flint,  Mississippi  Valley,  II,  149. 

Co  V aluation  Returns  of  1811,  MS.  in  Massachusetts  Archives. 


244 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


order  to  improve  marketing  conditions  the  Massachusetts  legislature  in  1806 
provided  for  compulsory  inspection  and  grading  of  all  hops  packed  for  ex¬ 
port.66  A  high  standard  of  inspection  was  established  and  conscientiously 
enforced,  with  the  result  that  Massachusetts  “  first  sort  ”  brand  became  noted 
as  the  best  in  the  United  States. 

“  Bv  adopting  a  high  standard  of  inspection,  the  growers  were  soon  brought  to  improve 
their  hops,  in  order  to  bring  them  up  to  the  ‘  first  sort,’  and  the  facts  and  character 
of  such  an  official  inspection  becoming  immediately  known  in  Europe,  those  who  sent 
orders  from  there  required  hops  of  Massachusetts  inspection,  and  they  in  consequence 
commanded  a  cent  or  two  on  a  pound  more  than  those  of  any  other  state. 

The  average  quantities  inspected  annually  under  this  law  were  as  follows  : 68 
1806  to  1815,  304,377  pounds;  1816  to  1825,  599-7^5  pounds;  1826  to  1S35, 

59545 1  pounds. 


POUNDS 

THOUSANDS 

800 


700 

600 

500 

400 

300 

200 

100 


/ 

/ 

n\/ 
h  v 

Prices 

C] 

/ 

/ 

' 

p - 

1 

3  1 

l  1 

1  1 

1 

1 

•  / 

. 

1 

l 

1  1 

\  1 

\  1 

\ _ L 

- f 

K  1 

/\  1 
1  \  1 

'hri — 

1  \  1 

/,  V 

■ 

» 

\ 

— \ 

}\  . 

A 

1  1 
\  3 
\  1 

_ JLi_ 

\  T 
V  ! 

1  \  / 
\  i\  / 
1  !  \  / 

pi 

— 1 - 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\  t 
\ 1 

I  »/ 

/ 

\ 

4  y 

1  \ 

1  \ 

M ^ 

l\. 

1  Y/ 

1  ” 

— 1 — 

Ins 

-44 - Aj 

y  C 

pec! ions 

1 

1 

t 

V 

/ 

/ 

\  / 

V 

\/  

1  1  1 

!  1  !  J 

_ _ 1 _ 1 — 1 — 1— 

_ 1 _ i_i — 1 — 

■  <  '  ■ 

_ 1 _ t _ t — t_ 

1  1  1  1— 

CENTS 
ER  LB. 

40 

35 

30 

25 

20 

I  5 

I  0 


v  1806  1810  1815  1320  1825  1830  1835  l8A0 

Fig.  32. — Hops :  quantity  inspected  and  prices  in  Massachusetts,  1806-1840. 


In  1836  the  high  point  of  the  industry  in  Massachusetts  seems  to  have  been 
reached.  In  that  year  about  850,000  pounds  were  inspected.  Before  1840  a 
marked  decline  had  set  in.  As  in  the  case  of  wool,  the  collapse  of  prices  follow¬ 
ing  the  crisis  of  1837  seems  to  have  brought  western  competition,  already 
potentially  strong,  sharply  into  the  foreground.  Farmers  in  central  New 
York,  principally  in  Madison,  Otsego  and  Oneida  Counties,  had  begun  about 

es  General  Laws  of  Massachusetts  (1823),  II,  156.  A  similar  law  was  enacted  in  New 
York  in  1819.  See  Revised  Statutes  of  New  York  (1829),  I,  565- 
ct  Flint,  in  Kettell,  Eighty  Years’  Progress ,  I,  89.  This  was  not,  however,  as  Mint 
claims,  “the  first  movement  of  the  kind  in  the  country.  Inspection  of  a  number 
of  exported  products,  notably  beef,  pork,  and  flour,  had  been  provided  by  colonia 
legislatures  beginning  in  the  early  eighteenth  century.  See  Rhode  Island  Records 4 
III,  527;  New  Jersey  Archives,  1st  series,  XVI,  340  Cary  and  Bioren,  Laws  of 

Pennsylvania,  I,  261.  , ,  _ 

G8  4th  Report,  Agriculture  of  Mass.  (1841),  pp.  490-91.  More  detailed  figures  are  give 

on  p.  498,  table  74. 


CROPS  AND  TILLAGE  245 

1825  to  grow  hops  for  domestic  and  export  markets.  In  that  year  inspections 
of  hops  produced  in  these  counties  amounted  to  450,500  pounds.09 

The  method  of  cultivating  and  harvesting  hops  as  practiced  in  New  England 
in  the  early  decades  of  the  nineteenth  century  has  been  described  as  follows  : 70 

“  The  hop  vine  was  trained,  or  trained  itself,  perhaps,  on  poles,  which  in  the  culture 
were  from  two  to  four  inches  in  diameter  at  the  base  and  fourteen  and  fifteen  feet 
in  length.  The  hills  in  the  field  were  set  at  a  distance  of  perhaps  five  feet  apart,  and 
averaged  about  one  thousand  to  an  acre. 

“  The  picking  commenced  usually  in  the  last  week  of  August,  and  continued  often 
until  far  into  the  first  half  of  September.  The  vines  were  cut  and  the  poles  taken  out 
of  the  ground  by  men  and  laid  upon  long  bins  sufficient  to  receive  the  entire  length  of 
the  vine,  which  was  usually  not  less  than  twelve  feet.  The  picking  was  done  by  young 
people,  boys  and  girls,  who  stood  on  each  side  of  the  bin. 

“  The  product  from  one  acre  was  about  1,000  pounds,  or  a  pound  to  a  hill,  of  dry 
hops.  T  he  drying  was  carried  on  in  a  building  erected  for  the  purpose,  the  hops  being- 
laid  over  lattice-work  on  the  floor ;  and  a  fire  of  charcoal  underneath  furnished  the  heat 
for  drying.  This  process  was  a  delicate  one,  as  it  was  necessary  to  extract  all  the  moisture 
from  the  hops  and  to  avoid  scorching,  as  that  injured  the  value  in  the  market.” 

Violent  price  fluctuations  made  hop-growing  a  speculative  enterprise,  and 
in  order  to  eliminate  this  risk  farmers  were  in  the  habit  of  making  contracts 
extending  over  several  seasons  with  buyers  who  guaranteed  to  take  the  product 
of  a  certain  number  of  acres  at  a  fixed  price.71 

BROOM  CORN  AND  TEASELS. 

Three  special  crops  were  profitably  grown  on  the  fertile  soils  of  the  Con¬ 
necticut  Valley  in  this  period — broom  corn,  fullers’  teasels,  and  tobacco,  Of 
these,  the  first  two  enjoyed  their  maximum  prosperity  in  1830  to  1840,  then 
succumbing  to  western  competition.  The  growing  of  broom  corn  dated  from 
about  the  year  1800.  In  1825  it  had  become  a  staple  in  the  river  towns;  in 
the  town  of  Hadley  alone  1,000  acres  were  annually  planted.  Said  a  writer 
in  the  Boston  Gazette : 72 

“  It  is  presumed  there  is  not  a  town  of  equal  extent  in  the  United  States,  in  which  so 
much  land  is  employed  in  the  cultivation  of  this  article.  In  a  tour  through  the  state 
of  New  York  to  Cayahoga  river  in  Ohio,  a  few  years  since,  we  did  not  notice  so  much 
as  half  an  acre  of  it  in  the  whole  distance.  We  understand,  however,  that  its  culture 
is  pretty  extensive  in  some  parts  of  New  Jersey.  The  mode  of  culture,  in  the  towns 
on  Connecticut  river,  is  very  similar  to  that  of  Indian  corn,  but  it  is  said  to  require  two 
or  three  times  as  much  labour.  The  produce  of  an  acre  varies  from  300  to  700  lbs.  of  that 
part  of  the  plant  which  is  made  into  brooms,  (a  few  inches  of  the  stalk,  and  the 
panicle  divested  of  seed),  and  from  25  to  70  bushels  of  seed.  Different  opinions  are 
entertained  as  to  the  value  of  the  seed.  Many  assert  that  it  is  superior  to  oats,  others 
estimate  it  much  lower.  It  is  probably  worth  25  cents  per  bushel  for  hogs  and  cattle, 
but  is  of  less  value  for  horses.  We  are  informed  that  the  crops  of  broom  corn  in  Hadley, 
Hatfield,  &c.  in  favourable  seasons,  are  worth  from  25  to  50  dollars  per  acre,  standing 
in  the  field.  A  considerable  portion  of  the  United  States  and  Canada  is  furnished  with 
brooms  by  the  towns  on  Connecticut  river,  and  we  learn  that  large  quantities  are  exported 
to  South  America.” 

The  brush  was  at  first  made  into  brooms  by  the  raisers,  as  a  by-industry  of 
farming.  Before  1840  the  processes  of  manufacturing  brooms  had  been  trans- 

69  N.  Y.  Assembly  Journal ,  49th  Session  (1826),  p.  650. 

70  Letter  of  George  S.  Boutwell,  in  Groton  Hist.  Series,  IV,  No.  5>  P-  374- 

71  Maine  Farmer,  II  (1834),  p.  45. 

72  Quoted  in  American  Farmer,  VII  (1825),  p.  300. 


246 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


ferred  from  the  farms  to  factories.  Prices  were  unsteady  and  the  business, 
like  hop  raising,  was  speculative.  In  1825  the  crops  standing  in  the  field  were 
valued  at  $25  to  $50  per  acre ; 73  in  1835  many  farmers  sold  at  the  rate  of  from 
$70  to  $100  per  acre.74 

“  About  1850  the  farmers  upon  the  western  prairies  began  the  raising  of  broom  corn 
exclusively  for  the  brush.  It  was  of  larger  growth,  long  and  straight,  cut  while  green, 
and  kilndried,  and  was  much  better  than  the  brush  raised  in  this  valley,  and  soon  occupied 
the  market.  The  brooms  made  from  the  western  brush  were  of  handsome  color,  the 
brush  having  been  cut  before  ripening ;  they  were  a  stronger  and  a  better  broom  in  every 
way,  the  outside  being  covered  with  the  hurls  of  the  brush  and  no  broom  made  from 
native  brush  could  compete  with  them.”  75 

Teasels,  used  by  woolen  manufacturers  to  raise  the  nap  on  cloth,  were  also 
grown  in  the  Connecticut  Valley.  In  1835  the  total  American  crop  was  esti¬ 
mated  at  42,000,000  heads,  of  which  30,000,000  were  grown  in  New  England. 
The  consumption  exceeded  the  domestic  supply  and  the  deficit  was  made  up  by 
imports  from  France  and  England.  Teasels  were  an  uncertain  crop,  carding 
from  an  average  yield  of  40*000  heads  per  acre  to  three  or  four  times  that 

number.76 

TOBACCO. 

Early  in  the  century  tobacco  was  a  cash  crop  in  the  Connecticut  Valley. 
It  was  bought  from  the  farmers  by  peddlers  and  marketed  in  the  hill  towns 
and  was  exported  to  the  West  Indies.  The  average  crop  was  perhaps  10  tons. 
Between  1800  and  1820  production  was  stimulated  by  the  establishment  of 
local  shops  which  began  manufacturing  plug  and  twist  tobacco  and  later 
cigars,  employing  farmers’  wives  and  daughters.  About  1825,  shipments  of 
tobacco  leaf  were  being  made  to  New  York,  where  the  Connecticut  Valley 
product  had  already  attained  a  high  reputation.  A  few  years  later  the  broad- 
leaf  plant  was  first  introduced  from  Maryland.  The  state  of  the  industry  in 
1836  was  described  by  Henry  Colman  as  follows  :  7‘ 

“  in  passing  through  East  Windsor,  in  Connecticut,  in  December  last,  I  was  surprised 
at  the  size  of  many  of  the  buildings  erected  and  used  for  the  puropse  of  drying  tobacco ; 
and  at  the  extent  to  which  I  was  informed  their  cultivation  of  this  plant  was  carried. 
I  was  told  that  one  hundred  acres  cultivated  with  tobacco  the  current  year  in  that 
place,  averaged  a  produce  of  2,400  lbs.  to  the  acre;  and  that  fourteen  acres  out  of  the 
hundred  yielded  2,800  lbs.  to  the  acre.  The  price  at  which  it  sells  this  year,  is  from  eight 
to  ten  cents  per  pound.  The  cultivation  is  understood  to  be  half  more  expensive  than 
Indian  corn;  and  the  sale  is  always  prompt.  Peculiar  advantages  are  enjoyed  in  this 
place  from  the  immediate  vicinity  of  very  large  gin  distilleries,  with  extensive  ‘  piggeries  ’ 
annexed.  The  hogs  are  fed  upon  the  refuse  grains,  and  great  quantities  of  the  most 

valuable  manure  are  in  this  way  furnished . The  average  crop  is  about  1,500  lbs.; 

2,000  lbs.  are  not  uncommon  to  an  acre ;  and  it  sells  from  five  to  seven  dollars  per  100 
lbs.  This  account  was  given  me  by  a  respectable  farmer  of  Long  Meadow,  Massachusetts, 
five  years  ago,  who  cultivated  the  plant  to  some  considerable  extent.  The  price  has  since 
that  time  advanced,  and  the  cultivation  of  it  has  been  extended.” 


73  New  England  Farmer,  IV  (1825-26),  p.  131. 

74  Jones,  The  Broom  Corn  Industry,  in  Pocumtuck  Valley  Memorial  Association,  His¬ 

tory  and  Proceedings,  IV,  108. 

75  Ibid.,  IV,  p.  no. 

76  New  York  Farmer ,  VI  (1833),  P-  271 ;  IX  ( 1836) ,  p.  6. 

77  Ibid.,  IX  (1836),  p.  33.  See  also  Conn.  State  Agric.  Soc.,  Transactions,  1856,  pp.  432 

et  seq. ;  New  England  Farmer,  XIV  (1835-36),  p.  171 ;  Temple,  Whately,  Massa¬ 
chusetts,  p.  176. 


Chapter  XIX. — The  Transition  from  Self-Suffi¬ 
cient  Economy  to  Commercial  Agriculture, 
its  Difficulties — its  Significance. 

'Fhe  transition  from  self-sufficient  economy  to  commercial  agriculture  was 
not  easily  accomplished.  The  powerful  forces  of  habit  and  tradition  tended 
to  keep  the  farmers  in  the  old  ways  of  producing  what  they  needed  for  their 
own  use,  selling  little  and,  as  a  matter  of  pride  as  well  as  of  necessity,  buying 
next  to  nothing.  In  addition,  farmers  as  a  class  were  hampered  by  the  lack 
of  business  experience.  They  were  often  the  victims  of  sharp  practice  in  buy¬ 
ing  seeds  and  implements,  and  in  selling  cattle,  wool,  and  miscellaneous  prod¬ 
uce.  Once  bitten,  twice  shy.  As  a  result  of  these  experiences  they  harbored 
suspicions,  often  unjustifiable,  of  all  business  men,  an  attitude  which  prevented 
their  taking  full  advantage  of  genuine  market  opportunities. 

CAPITAL  AND  CREDIT. 

The  lack  of  working  capital  was  a  serious  hindrance  to  improvement  and  to 
the  development  of  agriculture  as  a  business.  For  this  the  farmers  themselves 
were  in  part  to  blame.  What  surplus  funds  they  had  were  too  often  laid  out 
in  buying  more  land,  or  in  building  larger  houses,  or  invested  in  outside  enter¬ 
prises,  banks,  or  shipping  ventures,  rather  than  reinvested  productively  in  the 
farm  itself.  Consequently,  when  it  came  to  purchasing  the  new  labor-saving 
farm  machinery,  or  new  varieties  of  seeds  or  improved  livestock,  funds  were 
lacking.  Production  for  market,  particularly  in  the  case  of  the  more  intensive 
branches,  such  as  truck  gardening  and  milk  farming,  required  larger  outlays 
for  hired  labor  than  farmers  had  been  accustomed  to  make.  Here  again  they 
found  their  working  capital  inadequate.  The  farmers  as  a  rule  marketed  their 
produce  once  a  year,  in  the  winter,  and  consequently  had  to  provide,  either 
out  of  their  own  or  out  of  borrowed  funds,  working  capital  for  a  whole  year 
before  they  realized  anything  from  sales.  The  embarrassments  arising  from 
this  situation  were  described  in  the  New  England  Farmer : 1 

“Their  hired  hands  must  be  paid  in  autumn,  if  not  sooner,  and  if  they  expect  to 
get  store  goods  and  mechanics’  work  at  a  reasonable  rate,  they  must  pay  as  they  go 
along.  A  farmer  sells  his  pork,  butter,  cheese,  grain,  &c.  from  January  to  April.  The 
cost  of  producing  all  these,  was  paid,  (or  ought  to  have  been,)  the  summer  and  autumn 
before.  His  sheep  are  sheared  in  May,  and  should  be  able  to  convert  their  fleeces  im¬ 
mediately  into  money,  (which  he  cannot  always  do,)  still  the  whole  expense  of  pro¬ 
ducing  this  wool,  excepting  about  two  months  spring  pasturing,  was  paid  the  year  before, 
a  considerable  portion  of  it  the  August  before. 

“  It  cannot  be  denied  that  a  farmer  can  get  along  after  a  fashion  with  little  or  no 

capital,  because  it  is  done  by  thousands  every  year .  A  farmer  without  capital, 

in  the  first  place,  will  not  perhaps  hire  more  than  half  as  much  labor  as  his  farm 
requires;  of  course  all  his  work  is  slighted,  and  all  done  out  of  season,  and  half  crops 
is  the  consequence.  When  the  time  arrives  for  paying  his  laborers,  perhaps  he  will  get 


XXII  (1833-34),  p.  346. 


247 


248 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


some  things  out  of  the  store  for  them  on  trust,  or  borrow  a  little  money  to  pay  them  in 
part,  and  put  off  paying  the  remainder  until  winter  or  spring,  to  the  no  small  injury  of 
his  credit,  otherwise  he  must  force  sale  of  some  of  his  scanty  produce  at  a  reduced  price, 
to  make  out  the  pay.  In  the  next  place  he  buys  of  the  storekeeper  wholly  on  a  long 
credit,  and  pays  a  price  accordingly,  say  twenty  to  thirty  per  cent,  more  than  the  cash 
price.  His  dealings  with  the  blacksmith,  shoemaker,  and  mechanics  in  general,  are  after 
the  same  fashion.  And  thus  he  passes  his  life  continually  pinched  for  the  want  of  a 
little  money,  incessantly  harassed  by  duns,  and  once  in  a  while  appalled  by  a  tap  on  the 
shoulder,  though  gentle  it  may  be,  of  the  practised  hand  of  the  constable.” 

Very  few  farmers  made  use  of  bank  credit.  They  needed  small  loans  running 
from  six  months  to  a  year  and  such  accommodation  the  commercial  banks  were 
not  willing  to  furnish.  Henry  Colman  wrote : 2 3 

“  Bank  loans  are  in  general  too  short  and  capricious  to  be  safe  or  convenient  for 
farmers;  besides  that  banks  never  were  designed  for  farmers;  they  are  only  for 
merchants  and  manufacturers,  and  for  a  much  more  numerous  class,  who  are  the  very 
curse  of  every  industrious  community,  gamblers  and  speculators . ” 

Bankers,  in  common  with  other  business  men,  were  distrusted  and  feared. 
“  A  farmer  should  shun  the  door  of  a  bank,”  warned  the  New  England  Farm¬ 
er,*  “  as  he  would  an  approach  of  the  plague  or  cholera;  banks  are  for  men 
of  speculation,  and  theirs  is  a  business  with  which  farmers  should  have  little 
to  do.” 

The  country  store,  as  a  previous  quotation  indicates,  was  the  only  source 
of  short  time  or  “  intermediate  ”  farm  credit.  The  storekeeper  granted  credit 
freely,  the  rate  of  interest  being  not  definitely  specified  but  implied  in  the 
difference  between  credit  prices  and  cash  prices.  Losses  were  large  and  actual 
interest  charges  were  necessarily  high.  Such  a  system  of  credit  held  many 
dangers  for  the  farmers. 

“  Few  farmers  keep  any  accounts,  and  before  they  are  at  all  aware  they  have  a  long 
score  on  the  trader’s  books,  and  that  not  only  for  the  current  price  of  goods,  but  en¬ 
hanced  by  an  additional  charge  for  the  delay  of  payment.  But  there  is  another  circum¬ 
stance  in  this  case  which  is  not  always  considered.  In  many  instances,  the  trader  will 
purchase  the  produce  of  the  farmer  only  upon  what  is  called  store  pay — that  is,  making 
his  payment  in  goods  from  his  store.  The  farmer,  in  this  way,  is  not  only  obliged  to 
sell  at  the  lowest  market  price,  and  pay  the  trader  the  profit  upon  his  goods,  but  he  and 
his  family  are  induced  to  purchase  a  great  many  things  which  they  do  not  need  and  which 
they  would  be  better  without.  This  leads  likewise  to  the  keeping  of  an  open  account; 
which  if  not  most  rigidly  watched  and  frequently  settled,  is  as  sure  as  fate  to  surprize 
the  farmer  with  an  unexpected  and  heavy  balance  against  him.  This  usually  produces  ill 
blood  between  both  parties,  leading  to  vexatious  lawsuits  and  all  their  miserable  con¬ 
sequences  ;....”  4 

The  increase  of  mortgages  after  1830  on  eastern  farms  was  noted  with 
alarm.  In  some  of  “  the  most  beautiful  New  England  townships  ”  half  of  the 
farms  were  said  to  be  thus  encumbered.5  Mortgages  resulting  from  borrowing 
in  order  to  make  permanent  improvements  might  have  been  good  farm  finance, 
but  the  majority  of  obligations  incurred  in  this  period  seem  to  have  been  of 
a  different  origin,  representing  either  the  funding  of  unpaid  bills  at  the 
country  store  or  else  loans  for  outside  speculation.6 

2  New  England  Farmer,  XVII  (1837-38),  p.  78. 

3  XIII  (1834-35),  P-  368. 

4  Fourth  Report,  Agriculture  of  Massachusetts  (1841),  p.  182. 

5  Christian  Examiner,  quoted  in  New  England  Farmer,  X  (1831-32),  p.  1. 

6  New  York  Farmer,  IV  (1831),  pp.  154,  181. 


THE  TRANSITION  OF  SELF-SUFFICIENT  ECONOMY  249 


THE  ORGANIZATION  OF  MARKETS. 


The  injuries  and  losses  which  the  farmers  suffered  from  their  lack  of  busi¬ 
ness  experience  were  aggravated  by  the  imperfect  organization  of  markets. 
The  country  mei  chant  was  still,  as  in  colonial  days,  the  chief  buyer  of  farm 
.  products.  His  business  was  mostly  the  exchange  by  barter  of  salt,  sugar,  rum, 
and  miscellaneous  dry  goods,  for  pork,  beef,  cider,  household  manufactures, 
grain,  and  cattle.  By  the  extension  of  liberal  credit  he  financed,  also,  the  farm¬ 
ers  in  his  community.  The  country  store  combined,  therefore,  a  number 
of  services  now  rendered  by  specialized  middlemen.  It  was  inevitable  that 
the  functions  of  marketing  and  financing  should  have  been  poorly  performed 
and  at  high  cost.  Receiving  small  lots  of  miscellaneous  commodities  of  widely 
differing  quality,  the  storekeeper  could  make  little  or  no  attempt  at  inspection 
or  grading.  The  same  price  was  paid  for  butter,  cheese,  and  pork,  whether 
good,  bad,  or  indifferent.  Hence  farmers  who  disposed  of  their  produce  in 
this  way  had  no  incentive  to  improve  its  quality. 

Specialized  middlemen  began  to  develop  where  particular  commodities 
were  bought  and  sold  on  a  large  scale.  Such  were  the  drovers  who  took  cattle 
and  swine  from  the  farms  in  Ohio  to  eastern  markets,  and  from  Franklin 
County  and  from  Maine  to  Brighton.  Even  they  combined  transportation 
functions  with  selling  on  commission.  Farmers  near  the  great  markets  sold 
their  cattle  direct  to  the  butchers,  and  in  outlying  townships,  where  cattle 
fattening  was  not  a  specialty,  a  few  animals  were  sold  each  year  through  the 
country  stores.  Progress  was  evident  also  in  the  marketing  of  wool.  In  the 
early  years,  before  1830,  the  woolen  mills  were  small  and  scattered,  depending 
on  local  supplies  of  raw  material.  Some  manufacturers  had  their  own  flocks 
of  sheep.  Farmers  sold  their  wool  directly  to  the  factories,  trudging  40  or  50 
miles  with  their  clip  and  peddling  it  from  one  mill  to  another.7  Beginning 
about  1830  we  hear  of  middlemen,  agents  of  the  manufacturers,  who  travelled 
through  the  grazing  towns,  purchasing  wool  from  the  growers.8 

An  interesting  beginning  in  the  organization  of  farmers  for  united  action 
m  marketing  is  found  in  the  meetings  of  the  wool-growers  of  Winthrop, 
Maine,  in  1833  and  1834.  Complaining  of  false  market  rumors  circulated  by 
buyers,  and  of  the  lack  of  warehouse  facilities,  they  formulated  a  program  of 
reform  measures  which  sounds  strangely  modem.  They  demanded  a  decrease 
in  the  number  of  middlemen,  and  proposed  to  establish  an  agency  for  the 
collection  and  dissemination  of  market  information.  They  planned  also  tc 
build  warehouses  where  small  lots  of  wool  might  be  deposited  as  security 
for  loans  to  the  growers,  and  they  urged  united  action  in  holding  wool  for  a 
minimum  price  of  50  cents  a  pound.9  There  seems  to  be  no  evidence  that 
the  ambitious  program  was  ever  carried  out  or  that  the  organization  had  more 
than  a  brief  existence.  Somewhat  earlier,  in  1822,  the  barley-growers  of 
southeastern  Pennsylvania  had  attempted  to  remedy  unsatisfactory  marketing 
conditions  by  a  bold  experiment  in  cooperation.  Believing  that  the  Philadel¬ 
phia  brewers  had  combined  to  keep  down  the  price  of  barley,  the  farmers 


7  CO\fa >  P‘  l65  '>  N°rth>  in  Nat*  ASSO.  of  Wool 
Manufacturers,  Bulletin,  XXIV  (1894),  p.  242. 

aZa\ne  Farmer,  I  <(1833),  p.  211 ;  New  England  Farmer,  XIII  (1834-3O  o.  « 

Maine  Farmer,  I  (1833),  p.  178;  II  (1834),  p.  162;  New  York  Farmer,  VII  (1834), 
p.  301.  *  v 


250 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


determined  to  brew  their  own  grain  and  erected  a  building  for  the  purpose  m 
the  city.  The  venture  did  not  prove  successful,  and  after  a  few  years 
plant  was  sold  and  the  enterprise  was  abandoned.10 

THE  DECLINE  OF  HOUSEHOLD  INDUSTRIES. 

The  best  evidence  of  the  extent  and  the  rapidity  of  the  transition  from  self- 
sufficient  to  commercial  agriculture  is  found  in  the  decline  of  the  household  in¬ 
dustries.  At  the  beginning  of  the  nineteenth  century  the  typical  northern  farm¬ 
er  was  still  clad  in  homespun  cloth  made  of  wood  sheared  from  his  own 
sheep,  spun,  dyed,  and  woven  in  his  own  home  by  the  women  of  his  household 
Many  other  articles  of  household  furnishing,  such  as  blankets,  sheets,  an 
towels  were  also  made  by  these  hardworking  women.  Before  1840,  however, 
the  household  textile  industry  had  been  largely  transferred  to  the  new  cotton 
and  woolen  mills,  the  graceful  spinning  wheels  and  the  noisy  hand-looms  were 
being  relegated  to  the  attics  of  the  farmhouses,  there  to  accumulate  dust  and 
cobwebs  until  rescued  and  restored  to  posts  of  honor  by  the  antique-collectors 
of  our  own  generation.  The  transfer  of  the  textile  industries  from  farm 
homes  to  factories  constituted  an  industrial  revolution  whose  significance  in 
our  economic  history  has  often  been  pointed  out.  The  change  has  been 
studied  heretofore  chiefly  with  reference  to  the  development  of  the  technique 
of  manufactures  and  the  growth  of  a  class  of  wage-earning  industria  workers. 
But  from  the  point  of  view  of  the  history  of  the  rural  population,  the  decline 
of  household  industries  was  as  truly  revolutionary. 

As  soon  as  a  cash  income  could  be  obtained  from  the  sale  of  wool  or  gram, 
pork  beef,  or  livestock,  butter,  cheese,  or  milk,  or  garden  truck,  the  farmers 
began  to  buy  goods  that  they  had  formerly  produced  for  themselves.  Linen 
textiles  whose  production  was  more  arduous  than  woolens,  were  abandoned 
first  and  in  their  place  the  cotton  goods  of  the  new  factories  were  glad  y 
welcomed.  Flax,  formerly  raised  regularly  on  every  farm,  was  almost  entirely 
neglected  from  Maine  to  Ohio,  except  for  the  production  of  flaxseed.  A 
contemporary  wrote  from  Ohio  in  1838 :1_ 

“  Flax  seems  to  be  going  out  of  use,  and  our  people  cultivate  less  of  it  every  year. 
They  prefer  cotton  to  flax,  and  they  prefer  too,  the  cotton  cloths  of  Rhode  Island l  and 
Massachusetts  to  their  own  manufactured  cloths.  The  spinning  wheel,  the  reel,  and  he 
loom  are  not  much  used  in  Ohio,  especially  the  two  former.  Our  people  prefer  buying 
their  cloths  from  the  east,  to  making  them  here,  and  they  are  right.  The  productioi  0 
the  articles  of  food— meat  and  bread,  for  the  hungry  laborers  of  the  east,  best  suits 

our  present  condition.” 

Homespun  woolens,  as  well  as  the  factory  products,  were  given  a  consider¬ 
able  impetus  during  the  years  1807  to  1815,  when  the  importation  of  European 
cloths  was  largely  cut  off.  The  introduction  of  water-power  carding  machines 
between  1800  and  1810  lightened  the  tasks  of  household  manufacture,  so  that 
the  farm  women  were  able  not  only  to  clothe  their  families  more  easily,  but 

10  Futhey  and  Cope,  Chester  County  (Pennsylvania),  336-  .  .  f 

11  Long  in  N.  H.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  III  (1831),  p.  205;  Hoskins,  Vermont,  269, 

Massachusetts  Agricultural  Repository,  VI  (1820),  p.  309;  2d  Report,  Agn culture 
of  Massachusetts  (1838),  p.  45;  4 th  Report  (1841),  p.  163;  Putnam,  Touches  on 
Agriculture,  ch.  II,  p.  22. 

12  Atwater,  Ohio,  89. 


THE  TRANSITION  OF  SELF-SUFFICIENT  ECONOMY  251 

they  had  yarn  and  cloth  to  sell  at  the  country  stores.  Niles  13  estimated  in  1816 
that  in  Connecticut  500,000  yards  of  woolen  cloth  were  made  annually  in 
farm  homes  and  dressed  at  country  clothiers’  shops.  The  years  1815  to 
1820  probably  marked  the  climax  of  the  household  woolen  industry.14'  By 
1830  there  were  evidences  of  its  discontinuance.  The  reports  of  the"  annual 
cattle  shows  of  the  agricultural  societies  show  that  exhibits  of  home-made 
textiles  fell  off  rapidly  between  1820  and  1830  in  counties  where  manufactur¬ 
ing  and  urban  concentration  were  developing  most  rapidly.15  Naturally,  in 
districts  where  the  opportunities  for  the  sale  of  farm  products  were  best,  the 
country  people  soonest  abandoned  homespun  for  boughten  cloths.  The  reports 
received  in  answer  to  inquiries  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  in  1832  em¬ 
phasize  the  decline  of  household  manufactures.  A  report  from  Connecticut 
stated : 16 

“  Individual  and  household  manufactures  are  so  far  abandoned  as  to  be  comparatively 
inconsiderable.  Hand  labor  cannot  compete  with  the  adventitious  aids  of  machinery 
moved  by  water  power.” 

Massachusetts  and  Rhode  Island  reports  agreed  in  stating  that  except  in 
regions  remote  from  markets,  such  as  the  islands  of  Nantucket  and  Martha’s 
Vineyard  and  the  peninsula  of  Cape  Cod,  household  manufactures  had  prac¬ 
tically  disappeared.17  Colman,  10  years  later,  speaks  of  the  household  indus¬ 
try  of  Massachusetts  as  “  completely  destroyed,”  a  broad  generalization  which 
must  be  qualified.  In  a  number  of  instances  he  calls  attention  to  the  persis¬ 
tence  of  self-sufficient  economy  in  remote  townships,  but  such  cases  were 
exceptions,  sufficiently  rare  to  deserve  especial  comment.18 

In  New  Hampshire  a  significant  decline  in  household  manufactures  had 
taken  place  before  1830,  but  at  that  date  about  one-half  the  wearing  apparel, 
bedding,  carpeting,  etc.,  used  by  the  population  was  still  home  made.19 

The  reports  received  in  1832  from  the  Middle  States  contain  little  com¬ 
ment  on  household  manufactures,  but  indicate  a  declining  tendency,  except  in 
western  Pennsylvania.20  In  New  York  the  State  censuses  of  1825,  1835.  and 
1845  showed  a  rapid  decline  in  the  production  of  all  household  textiles.  The 
total  product  in  1825  amounted  to  16,500,000  yards  or  about  9  yards  per 
capita ;  20  years  later  the  total  product  was  7,000,000  yards,  or  2J  yards 
per  capita.21 

SIGNIFICANCE  OF  DECLINE  OF  HOUSEHOLD  INDUSTRIES. 

The  significance  of  the  decay  of  the  household  manufactures  can  hardly 
be  exaggerated.  Even  before  the  change  was  wholly  completed,  its  importance 

13  Weekly  Register,  X  (1816),  p.  82.  See  also  Ibid.,  VIII  (1815),  p.  234. 

14  Wright,  Wool  Growing  and  the  Tariff,  58. 

15  Massachusetts  Agricultural  Repository,  VII  (1821),  p.  22:  X  (1831).  0.  243:  New 

England  Farmer,  VIII  (1829-30),  p.  126. 

16  Documents  Relative  to  Manufactures  in  the  United  States  (Ex.  Doc.  308,  22  Con«-. 

1st  sess.),  I,  977. 

17  Ibid.,  I,  75,  78,  134,  et  passim. 

18  4th  Report,  Agriculture  of  Massachusetts  (1841),  pp.  156,  178;  2d  Report  (1838) 

p.  61. 

19  Documents  Relative  to  Manufactures  in  the  United  States  (Ex.  Doc.  308,  22  Cong., 

1  sess.),  I,  585. 

Summarized  in  Tryon,  Household  Manufactures  in  the  United  States,  293. 

21  Ibid.,  304. 


252  AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 

was  recognized  by  the  leading  thinkers  of  the  day.  Horace  Bushnell  said  to 
the  Litchfield  farmers  in  1851  *. 

«  This  transition  from  mother,  and  daughter,  power  to  water,  and  steam-power  is  a 
great  one,  greater  by  far  than  many  have  as  yet  begun  to  conceive— one  that  is  to  carry 
with  it  a  complete  revolution  of  domestic  life  and  social  manners. 

The  prophecy  proved  true.  As  self-sufficient  farming  declined  there  went 
with  it  long-established  habits  and  traditions,  not  only  in  the  method  of  getting 
a  living,  but  also  in  ways  of  thinking  and  of  living.  The  mores  of  se  - 
maintenance,  to  use  Sumner’s  phrase,  were  revolutionized,  and  there  followed 
of  necessity  a  change  in  the  ideas  and  ideals  of  the  rural  folk,  in  family  and 

in  social  relations.  .  .  A 

The  self-sufficient  economy  emphasized  the  virtues  of  self-reliance  and 

independence,  of  frugality  and  thrift.  As  Bushnell  remarked,  it  harnessed 
together  in  the  productive  process  all  the  members  of  the  family,  young  and 
old,  male  and  female ;  it  concentrated  attention  upon  the  interests  of  the  family 
group  rather  than  upon  the  interests  of  its  individual  members.  The  introduc¬ 
tion  of  the  cash  nexus,  the  selling  of  certain  articles  and  buying  of  others, 
forced  the  farmers  to  confront  a  new  set  of  problems,  calling  for 
the  exercise  of  a  new  set  of  faculties.  Shrewdness  in  buying  and 
selling  must  now  be  added  to  the  simpler  qualities  of  hard  work  and  saving. 
Farming  became  a  more  speculative  business,  for  to  the  already  existent  risks 
of  weather  conditions  was  added  the  risk  of  price  fluctuations.  Thereafter 
success  in  getting  a  living  no  longer  depended  on  the  unremitting  efforts  of 
the  farm  family,  aided  by  Providence,  but  to  a  large  extent  also  upon  the 
unpredictable  wants  and  labors  of  millions  of  persons  in  the  industrial  villages 
and  in  the  newer  farms  to  the  westward. 

NEW  EMPLOYMENTS  FOR  FARM  WOMEN. 

It  is  clear  that,  in  the  long  run,  the  transfer  of  the  production  of  textiles 
from  the  farmhouse  to  the  factory  must  have  been  of  advantage  to  the  rural 
population.  Production  was  far  more  effectively  carried  on  in  the  factories, 
so  that  eventually  the  farmers  got  more  goods  for  a  given  amount  of  labor 
by  concentrating  their  efforts  on  purely  agricultural  operations.  But  only  in 
the  long  run  were  the  advantages  of  the  change  clearly  apparent.  In  the 
meantime,  during  the  20  or  30  years  of  transition,  there  were  a  number  of  dis¬ 
couraging  difficulties.  There  was,  first  of  all,  the  problem  of  finding  a  new 
employment  for  the  farmers’  wives  and  daughters.  Remarks  such  as  the 
following  show  how  this  problem  was  presented : 23 

“  It  is  a  deceptive  and  dangerous  economy,  which  induces  a  farmer  to  buy  all  his 
woolens  of  the  manufacturer,  merely  because  he  can  buy  them  cheap  cheaper  even  than 

he  supposes  he  can  make  them  at  home . While  the  farmer  is  buying  at  the  store, 

what  he  could  make  at  home,  ....  the  members  of  his  family,  whose  labour  could 
produce  the  same  articles,  are  unemployed,  or  employed  to  little  or  no  purpose. 

Colman,  who  was  a  clergyman  as  well  as  an  agriculturist,  speaks  with 
regret  in  several  instances  of  the  decline  of  the  household  manufactures  be¬ 
cause  the  “healthy  exercise  of  domestic  labour”  has  been  exchanged  for 


22  Work  and  Play,  382. 

23  New  England  Farmer ,  VIII  (1829-30),  p.  126. 


THE  TRANSITION  OF  SELF-SUFFICIENT  ECONOMY  253 


“  the  idleness  and  frivolities  of  pride  and  luxury  ” ; 24  and  again,  emphasizing 
the  economic  rather  than  the  moral  aspects  of  the  problem,  he  speaks  of  the 
“  internal  resources  of  the  farmer  ”  having  “  dried  up.”  25 

Anyone  familiar  with  the  exhausting  toil  of  the  farm  women  of  the  earlier 
years  might  have  remarked  that  they  had  well  deserved  a  rest.  But  habit  and 
tradition,  and  economic  pressure  as  well,  decreed  otherwise.  The  traditional 
ethics  required  all  to  be  producers  and  none  merely  consumers.  No  one  knew 
what  evil  work  the  Devil  might  find  for  idle  hands,  especially  if  these  hands 
were  women’s.  The  fear  was  expressed  that  the  farmer’s  daughters  would 
not  only  lose  skill  “  but  they  will  have  more  time  to  be  idle,  and  thus  will  be 
less  fit  for  good  and  profitable  wives.”  26  Moreover,  the  wants  of  the  farm 
family  were  expanding  rapidly.  The  urban  population  were  establishing  a 
new  and  higher  standard  of  living;  the  farmers’  daughters  wanted  better 
clothes,  and  pianos  like  those  of  their  city  cousins. 

The  problem  of  finding  new  employment  for  the  farm  women  was  solved 
in  two  ways :  ( I )  by  their  leaving  the  farms  and  taking  employment  in  the 
rapidly  growing  urban  centers,  either  in  factories,  or  as  school  teachers,  or 
in  domestic  service;  (2)  by  the  introduction  of  new  industrial  occupations  in 
the  home.  We  know  how  important  was  the  migration  of  the  farmers’ 
daughters  to  Lowell,  Lawrence,  and  Fall  River  in  the  years  around  1840, 
furnishing  an  indispensable  labor  force  for  the  new  factories,  and  it  would  be 
interesting  to  trace  their  fortunes  further,  but  we  are  concerned  here  chiefly 
with  those  who  stayed  on  the  farms.  The  employments  to  which  the  latter 
now  turned  their  attention  were  the  sewing  of  shoes,  the  plaiting  and  sewing 
of  straw  and  palm-leaf  hats  and  bonnets,  and  the  production  of  men’s  ready- 
to-wear  clothing.  An  extreme  example  of  the  efforts  to  utilize  the  surplus 
labor  force  on  farms  is  seen  in  the  misguided  attempts  to  hatch  silk-worms 
and  produce  reeled  silk. 


BY-INDUSTRIES. 

Most  of  the  employments  enumerated  above  were  not  new.  The  farm 
women  had  long  been  making  their  own  bonnets  and  their  husbands’  and 
fathers’  shirts  and  underclothes ;  but  whereas  formerly  such  articles  were 
produced  principally  for  home  consumption,  after  about  1830  or  1840  they 
were  produced  principally  for  sale.  The  organization  of  production  was  what 
is  known  to  economists  as  the  commission  system,  a  transitional  stage  between 
household  and  factory  production.  The  employer  was  a  merchant  who  pro¬ 
vided  the  straw,  cloth,  or  parts  of  shoes.  He  also  undertook  to  dispose  of  the 
finished  product,  paying  the  workers  on  a  commission  basis. 

In  the  making  of  shoes,  the  most  important  of  these  domestic  manufactures, 
the  men  were  also  employed.  In  some  townships  in  Massachusetts  a  very 
large  proportion  of  the  population  was  actively  engaged  in  shoe-making.  In 
1837,  in  the  town  of  Grafton  for  instance,  1,400,  or  almost  one-half  of  a 


24  Second  Report ,  Agriculture  of  Massachusetts  (1838),  p.  138. 

25  “  In  the  changes  which,  since  the  introduction  of  extensive  manufactories  of  cotton 

and  woolen  among  us,  have  taken  place  in  our  habits  of  domestic  labour,  some  of  the 
internal  resources  of  the  farmer  have  dried  up,  and  new  occasions  of  expenditure 
introduced.”  Fourth  Report  (1841),  p.  181. 

26  Wilder,  Leominster,  Massachusetts,  p.  29. 


254  AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 

total  population  of  2,900,  were  officially  reported  as  making  shoes. 2^  A 
writer  in  the  New  England  Farmer  said  that  the  industry  in  Grafton  is  a 
domestic  manufacture,  chiefly  carried  on  by  men  at  their  own  homes,  with 
their  own  means,  where  their  labors  and  those  of  their  families  alternate  with 
the  care  of  their  gardens  and  farms,  promoting  health  and  furnishing  recrea¬ 
tion.”  28  Of  Essex  County,  where  the  farmer  shoemakers  were  most  numerous, 
Colman  wrote :  “  Farming  in  this  county  is  scarcely  pursued  as  a  distinct  or 
exclusive  profession  \  but  as  subsidiary  to  some  other  business  or  pursuit. 

The  farmers  carried  on  a  wide  variety  of  quasi-industrial  pursuits,  by¬ 
industries  which  in  some  cases  were  more  lucrative  than  agriculture.  Building 
operations  in  the  growing  industrial  communities  demanded  sand,  stone,  and 
timber.  Besides  these,  the  farms  furnished  to  the  city-dwellers  enormous  quan¬ 
tities  of  firewood  and  charcoal,  the  products  of  the  winter  months.  The 
Yankee  had  long  been  famous  as  a  whittler,  and  in  these  years  he  turned  his 
experience  in  wood-working  to  good  account.  The  extent  and  variety  of 
the  wooden  wares  produced  in  some  of  the  more  remote  communities  is  aston¬ 
ishing.  Partly  they  were  made  by  farmers  in  small  shops  on  their  own  prem¬ 
ises,  and  partly  in  small  factories  utilizing  water-power,  where  the  farmers 
worked  intermittently  in  the  winter  and  between  seasons.  The  numerous  by¬ 
industries  carried  on  by  the  New  England  farmers  and  by  their  wives  and 
daughters  provided  an  important  supplement  to  the  farm  income.  The  pros¬ 
perity  of  many  communities  out  of  reach  of  the  market  influences  can  be  ex¬ 
plained  only  by  the  existence  of  these  quasi-industrial  pursuits. 

SUMMARY. 

The  first  four  decades  of  the  nineteenth  century  were  characterized  by 
important  beginnings  in  agricultural  progress,  rather  than  by  striking  or 
revolutionary  accomplishments.  It  was  a  period  of  preparation  both  in  the 
technical  and  in  the  business  sides  of  farming— preparation  for  subsequent 
progress  and  expansion.  The  home  market  beckoned  to  farmers  with  its  new 
opportunities.  But  the  road  to  successful  commercial  agriculture  was  beset 
with  many  difficulties  and  hindrances.  The  factory  villages  were  drawing 
the  most  ambitious  boys  and  girls  away  from  the  farm.  The  competition  of 
the  factories  raised  the  wages  of  farm  hands  at  a  time  when  the  prices  of 
farm  products  were  falling  or  at  best  stationary.  The  farmers  were  hampered 
by  their  inexperience  in  business  affairs,  by  their  lack  of  capital,  by  imperfect 
credit  and  marketing  facilities,  and  by  the  persistence  of  the  habits  and  tradi¬ 
tions  of  the  self-sufficient  economy.  The  rule  that  the  farm  should  supply  all 
that  the  farm  consumed  had  acquired  the  validity  of  an  article  of  religious 
faith.  To  buy  from  outside  goods  which  might  be  produced  at  home  was  held 
to  be  not  only  bad  economy  but  also  doubtful  morality.  When  production 
for  sale  had  finally  begun  there  arose  the  perplexing  question  what  to  produce. 
The  eastern  farmer  discovered  he  had  no  monopoly  of  the  home  market. 
Cheaper  transportation  introduced  western  competition,  causing  unstable  mar- 

27  Massachusetts,  Secretary  of  State,  Statistics  of  Certain  Branches  of  Industry  ( 1837 ) » 

pp.  50,  206. 

28  XV  (1836-37),  P-  57-  , 

29  First  Report,  Agriculture  of  Massachusetts  (1837),  p.  14. 


THE  TRANSITION  OF  SELF-SUFFICIENT  ECONOMY  255 


kets.  Wheat,  pork,  wool,  hops,  butter,  and  cheese  all  came  more  cheaply  from 
the  West,  forcing  the  easterners  to  make  rapid  readjustments. 

The  farmer  did  not  have  to  fight  his  battle  alone.  The  agricultural  societies 
and  the  farm  papers  came  to  his  aid  with  encouragement  and  advice.  They 
exhorted  him  to  use  manures  more  liberally,  to  sow  clover,  and  to  plant  roots, 
to  take  better  care  of  his  livestock,  and  to  pay  more  attention  to  breeding, 
d  hey  called  to  his  notice  the  new  labor-saving  machinery  and  stimulated  inter¬ 
est  in  new  varieties  of  grain  and  in  improved  types  of  sheep,  swine,  and 
cattle.  The  educational  propaganda  was  necessarily  defective,  however,  for 
the  natural  sciences,  such  as  chemistry,  biology,  and  botany,  were  still  in 
ther  infancy  and  their  application  to  agriculture  had  scarcely  begun.  Editors 
and  speakers  might  urge  the  farmer  to  use  gypsum  or  lime,  or  to  choose  breed¬ 
ing  stock  more  carefully,  but  not  one  of  them  could  tell  him  how  plants  grow, 
whether  they  derived  nourishment  from  the  atmosphere  or  the  soil,  or  from 
both,  and  no  one  could  explain  to  him  the  laws  of  heredity  lying  at  the  basis 
of  all  scientific  breeding.  In  matters  of  farm  economics  sound  leadership 
was  lacking.  Both  the  publications  of  the  agricultural  societies  and  the  farm 
papers  contained  fallacious  arguments  against  leaving  the  beaten  paths  of 
the  self-sufficient  economy.  We  read  in  the  Memoirs  of  the  New  York  Board 
of  Agriculture : 30 

“  In  regard  to  economy,  the  general  committee  would  remark,  that  the  farmer  who 
understands  and  practices  his  own  business,  in  the  right  way,  is  a  true  economist:  his 
farm  should  produce  every  thing  necessary  to  sustain  life  in  a  comfortable  and  respect¬ 
able  manner;  and  he  should  surround  himself  with  every  thing  that  he  wants,  by  his 
own  industry.” 

Twenty  years  later  we  find  Colman  31  asserting  that 

“  it  must  be  considered  as  an  established  principle  in  domestic  economy  that  every 
farmer  should  look  to  his  farm  for  all  that  his  farm  can  furnish  him.  Though  it  may 
seem  better  to  sell  his  wool  and  buy  his  bread,  yet  in  all  such  cases  he  pays  a  double 
commission,  to  the  purchaser  of  the  wool  and  the  seller  of  the  bread,  who  must  both  get 
their  living  out  of  the  operation.” 

It  was  the  principle  of  self-sufficiency  applied  to  the  whole  region  rather 
than  to  the  single  home  which  explains  the  absurd  attempts  to  promote  wheat 
cultivation  in  New  England  by  State  bounties.  As  astute  an  agriculturist  as 
Ezekiel  Holmes  denied  in  1837  that  Maine  could  not  successfully  compete  with 
New  York  in  raising  wheat.  He  wrote: 32 

“  The  time  has  been  when  the  citizens  of  Maine  raised  more  wheat  than  they  consumed, 
and  exported  it  in  large  quantities.  What  has  been  done  can  be  done  again.  It  is  all  idle 
to  say  that  we  cannot  raise  wheat.  Our  average  crop  per  acre  is  equal  to  the  average 
crop  of  New  York  per  acre.  The  reason  is,  we  do  not  cultivate  as  many  acres.  It  is  true 
we  cannot  raise  winter-wheat  so  well  as  they  can,  and  that  brings  the  labor  of  our 
wheat  crops  into  a  smaller  compass  of  time  than  theirs,  but  we  can  raise  as  much  and 
make  as  good  flour  if  we  can  only  sow  as  much,  and  were  as  careful  in  flouring  it.  All 
we  need  is  energy  in  this  matter. — More  courage  and  less  crying  out  ‘  there’s  a  lion  in  the 
way — there’s  a  lion  in  the  way.’  ” 

Advice  of  this  kind,  as  subsequent  events  proved,  was  not  forward-looking. 
Men  who  wrote  and  talked  in  this  strain  showed  no  conception  of  the  readjust- 


30 1  (1821),  p.  XXX. 

31  4th  Report,  Agriculture  of  Massachusetts  (1841),  p.  159. 

32  Maine  Farmer,  V  (1837),  p.  81;  see  also  IV  (1836),  pp.  258,  386. 


256  AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 

ments  in  eastern  farming  which  western  competition  was  to  bring  about. 
The  advice  they  gave  the  farmers  was  comfortable  rather  than  stimulating, 
tending  to  confirm  them  in  their  old  habits  of  self-sufficiency  and  in  their 
traditional  isolation  from  market  influences.  But  in  the  midst  of  the  confusion 
of  faulty  reasoning  based  on  imperfect  knowledge,  there  was  occasionally 
raised  the  voice  of  a  true  prophet,  with  clearness  of  vision  to  foresee  the  inevi¬ 
table  westward  trend  in  certain  lines  of  production,  and  courage  to  proclaim 
his  vision  to  a  doubting  generation.  Such  a  prophet  was  William  Buckminster, 
the  orator  at  the  Concord,  Massachusetts,  cattle  show  of  1838.  He  said:33 

“If  more  fertile  regions  can  supply  our  cities  with  grain  at  a  cheaper  rate  than 
we  can,  let  us  not  lament.  We  shall  find  full  employment  in  furnishing  what  cannot 
so  well  be  transported  from  a  distance.  Fresh  meats,  butter,  hay,  and  the  small  market 
vegetables  must  be  supplied  by  the  farmers  of  N.  England. 

“  Beef  cattle  cannot  cross  the  North  river  to  compete  with  ours,  and  if  we  fail  to  supply 
all  the  wants  of  our  own  markets  we  can  furnish  those  that  are  most  to  our  advantage. 
It  is  believed  that  the  raising  of  grain  of  any  kind  and  fitting  it  for  market  is  the  most 
laborious  and  the  least  profitable  employment  we  engage  in ;  and  we  should  bear  in  mind 

that  grain  is  the  greatest  exhauster  of  the  soil. 

“The  times  are  changed  and  we  must  change  with  them.  We  cannot  now,  as  formerly 

raise  much  grain  for  the  market. 

“  The  virgin  soils  of  the  west  and  the  increasing  facilities  of  intercourse  with  that  region 
render  it  probable  that  much  of  our  grain  will  be  imported  thence ;  and  when  no  obstacles 
are  thrown  in  the  way  of  commerce,  this  is  no  evil.  We  purchase,  not  because  we 
cannot  produce  the  same  commodity,  but  because  we  can  produce  others  to  more  profit. . 

“  Let  them  supply  our  cities  with  grain.  We  will  manufacture  their  cloth  and  their 
shoes.  Our  artists  may  eat  bread  from  the  west — we  will  supply  them  with  what  cannot 
be  brought  from  a  distance.” 


33  New  England  Farmer,  XVII  (1838-39),  p.  H3- 


Part  IV 

NORTHERN  AGRICULTURE  1840-1860 

THE  PERIOD  OF  TRANSFORMATION 

BY 

John  I.  Falconer,  Ph.  D. 


18 


# 


■ 


Chapter  XX. — Northern  Agriculture  in  1840. 

NEW  ENGLAND  FARMING  IN  1840. 

In  New  England,  in  1840,  hay  was  the  leading  crop.  The  “  ne  wsystem  of 
agriculture  ”  had  become  well  established  on  tillable  land,  and  a  rotation  of 
crops  was  followed,  including  com,  potatoes,  or  oats,  wheat  or  rye,  and  grass. 
Instead  of  pursuing  a  definite  order  of  cropping,  as  in  Chester  County, 
Pennsylvania,  the  land  was  usually  allowed  to  lie  in  grass  as  long  as  it  would 
yield  1  ton  of  hay  to  the  acre.  More  attention  was  given  to  grazing  in  New 
England  and  less  to  grain  growing.  The  purpose  of  sowing  a  grain  crop  was 
said  to  be  largely  to  supply  the  farm  with  grain  and  to  renew  the  land  in 
grass.  For  20  years  improvements  had  been  taking  place  in  the  eastern  field 
system.  The  use  of  clover  had  spread  rapidly,  gypsum  and  lime  had  come 
into  extensive  use,  rotation  systems  were  more  widely  practiced.  Lowlands 
were  more  frequently  plowed  and  manured,  uplands  more  frequently  seeded 
to  clover  and  grass.  The  adoption  of  the  cast-iron  plow  had  allowed  much 
improvement  in  the  preparation  of  the  land.  Cattle-grazing,  wool-growing, 
and  dairying  had  developed  rapidly. 

Soil  improvement  was  a  characteristic  of  the  progress  in  agriculture  in  the 
East  during  the  decades  1820  to  1840.  In  fact,  “the  New  System  of  Hus¬ 
bandry  ”  had  begun,  similar  to  that  inaugurated  in  England.  Its  principles 
were  summarized  by  Judge  Jesse  Buel,  editor  of  The  Cultivator ,  who  asserted 
that  lands  would  not  wear  out  if  they  were  judiciously  managed;  but,  on  the 
contrary,  they  could  be  made  to  increase  progressively  in  productivity.  He 
wrote : 1 

“  The  principles  of  the  new  husbandry  also  teach  that  by  carefully  saving,  and  suit¬ 
ably  applying,  all  the  fertilizing  matters  afforded  by  the  farm;  by  an  alternation  or 
change  of  crops,  and  by  artificially  accelerating  or  retarding  the  agency  of  heat,  moisture, 
air,  and  light,  in  the  process  of  vegetable  growth ;  by  draining,  manuring,  ploughing, 
harrowing,  hoeing,  etc.,  we  may  preserve,  unimpaired,  the  natural  fertility  of  our  soils; — 
and  that,  with  the  aid  of  improved  implements  of  husbandry,  and  a  good  system  of 
management,  we  may  also  greatly  increase  the  profits  of  its  culture.” 

It  was  urged  by  many  that  the  adoption  of  “the  New  System  of  Hus¬ 
bandry  ”  was  the  most  effective  way  for  the  Eastern  States  to  meet  the  compe¬ 
tition  of  the  West. 

During  the  thirties,  fine  wool-growing  had  been  considered  a  profitable 
enterprise  and  had  been  extensively  pursued,  together  with  dairying,  in  all 
the  New  England  States,  especially  in  Vermont  and  in  the  Berkshire  region 
of  western  Massachusetts  and  Connecticut.  With  the  general  fall  of  prices 
after  1837,  the  price  of  wool  had  declined,  and  by  1840  eastern  wool-growers 
were  declaring  it  no  longer  profitable  to  produce  fine  wool.  About  this  time, 
moreover,  the  increasing  population  and  wealth  of  the  eastern  manufacturing 
cities,  the  extension  of  cotton  planting  in  the  South,  and  the  development  of 


1  Buel,  The  Farmer’s  Companion,  21. 


259 


260 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


an  export  trade  in  cheese  were  causing  an  increased  demand  for  meat  and 
dairy  products.  By  1840,  cattle-grazing  and  dairying  were  considered  more 
profitable  than  wool-growing  in  New  England,  and  were  increasing,  while 
the  latter  was  rapidly  declining. 

Swine-raising  was  also  receiving  decreasing  attention  on  New  England 
farms  in  1840,  owing  to  the  competition  of  western  pork,  to  the  development 
of  new  markets,  and  to  the  adoption  of  improved  farming  methods.  With 
the  coming  of  cheap  western  pork  the  New  England  farmer  found  it  profitable 
to  keep  only  enough  swine  to  consume  the  waste  of  the  farm,  and  at  the 
same  time  crop  rotation,  dairying,  and  commercial  agriculture  were  tending 
to  reduce  farm  waste.  The  potato  crop,  which  formerly  had  furnished  an 
important  part  of  the  swine  ration,  greatly  decreased  in  amount  and  increased 
in  value  after  the  appearance  of  the  blight  in  1844.  Corn,  which  was  formerly 
used  in  fattening  swine,  was  now,  on  account  of  its  increased  value,  diverted 
to  cattle.  Wool,  pork,  and  wheat  were  all  declining  in  New  England  by 
1840,  while  dairying  and  the  production  of  hay,  corn,  vegetables,  and  fruits 
were  increasing. 

The  area  of  improved  lands  in  farms  in  the  East  was  not  shown  in  the 
census  of  1840.  Production  figures,  however,  seem  to  indicate  a  small  increase 
of  improved  acreage  in  this  region  in  the  years  1840  to  1850.  For  the  eastern 
farmer  the  age  of  farming  by  extension  of  area  had  ceased  and  that  by 
increased  investment  of  capital  had  well  begun.  By  1840  a  summer  fallow 
was  rarely  seen  in  New  England,  in  eastern  New  York,  or  Pennsylvania, 
except  in  the  more  remote  regions ;  the  practice  was  rapidly  declining  in  the 
Mohawk  Valley  of  New  York.  Diversified  farming  with  cattle  and  sheep 
grazing  had  become  the  prevailing  system. 

The  New  England  farmer  had  several  other  sources  of  income,  aside  from 
the  products  of  his  fields.  In  Maine  and  in  northern  New  Hampshire  farming 
was  still  closely  connected  with  lumbering,  and  in  many  sections  more  atten¬ 
tion  was  given  to  the  latter  than  to  the  former.  Working  in  the  woods  in 
the  winter  and  on  the  farm  in  the  summer  was  a  common  practice.  Teaming 
to  the  cities  and  to  seaboard  towns  was  another  source  of  income.  In  Ver¬ 
mont,  the  manufacture  of  maple  sugar  was  a  flourishing  enterprise. 

IN  EASTERN  AND  CENTRAL  NEW  YORK. 

In  eastern  and  central  New  York,  conditions  of  farming  in  1840  were  much 
the  same  as  in  New  England.  Cattle-grazing  and  dairying  were  receiving 
increased  attention,  the  latter  having  taken  the  place  of  wheat  as  the  chief 
source  of  income.2  The  Hudson  and  Mohawk  Valleys  were  the  leading  dairy 
sections  of  the  country.  Orange,  Dutchess,  Herkimer,  and  Oneida  Counties 
were  all  famous  for  their  dairy  produce.  Wool-growing,  one  of  the  former 
chief  sources  of  income,  was  rapidly  declining.  Wheat  and  hogs  showed  a 
tendency  to  decrease. 

Throughout  the  East,  the  growth  of  cities,  as  yet  without  railroad  connec¬ 
tions  with  the  interior,  was  leading  to  intensive  farming  in  their  vicinities. 
On  Long  Island,  wheat,  rye,  and  corn  had  formerly  been  the  staple  products ; 


2  N.  Y.  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions,  I  (1841),  p.  135. 


NORTHERN  AGRICULTURE  IN  1840 


261 


but  the  opening  of  the  Erie  Canal  and  the  consequent  competition  of  western 
grain,  together  with  the  development  of  the  New  York  market,  had  changed 
the  type  of  agriculture.  The  central  part  of  the  north  shore  of  the  island 
in  1840  were  largely  devoted  to  corn,  oats,  and  hay,  with  vegetable  crops  in 
those  parts  best  suited  for  their  production.  On  the  south  side  of  the  island, 
where  the  soil  was  light,  sandy,  and  warm,  early  vegetables  and  small  fruits 
were  grown  with  great  success  by  the  aid  of  ashes  and  manure  brought  out 
from  the  cities.3  Two  crops  were  frequently  taken  from  the  land  in  one  year. 
Market  gardening  and  small-fruit  growing  were  developing  in  New  Jersey, 
Delaware,  and  along  the  shores  of  Chesapeake  Bay  in  Maryland. 

In  the  vicinities  of  the  large  eastern  cities,  such  as  Philadelphia  and  New 
\  ork,  the  selling  of  veal  calves  was  found  a  very  profitable  enterprise.  In 
Queens  County,  New  York,  which  supplied  the  New  York  market,  a  good 
calf  at  a  month  or  six  weeks  old  was  said  to  be  worth  as  much  as  at  2  years  of 
age.4  The  supply  of  milk  for  many  of  the  large  cities  was  furnished  in  part 
by  herds  of  200  or  300  head  of  cattle,  fed  the  entire  year  on  brewers’  grains. 
In  the  vicinity  of  Rochester,  New  York,  it  was  said  to  be  profitable  to  keep 
a  cow  to  an  acre  of  land. 

IN  SOUTHEASTERN  PENNSYLVANIA. 

In  southeastern  Pennsylvania,  one  of  the  old  and  important  centers  of  im¬ 
proved  agriculture  in  1840,  three  systems  of  husbandry  were  practiced:  (1) 
The  cropping  system,  which  was  usually  followed  by  the  German  farmers  on 
the  best  land.  In  this  system  nearly  all  the  land  was  cropped  in  a  rotation  of 
corn,  oats  or  barley,  wheat,  and  clover.  (2)  A  mixed  system,  in  which  a  part 
of  the  farm,  well  watered,  was  kept  aside  for  permanent  pasture  and  received 
a  frequent  top-dressing  of  lime,  or  short  manure.  The  remainder  was  cropped 
as  in  the  first  system.  (3)  The  grazing  system,  uniformly  adopted  in  the  east¬ 
ern  counties  near  Philadelphia  for  dairy  purposes,  and  for  feeding  cattle  for 
the  shambles.  Very  little  plowing  was  done  in  this  system,  and  merely  enough 
grain  was  raised  for  the  consumption  of  the  family  and  livestock,  the  re¬ 
mainder  of  the  farm  being  given  to  pasture  and  hay.5  Near  the  cities  and  large 
towns,  where  the  farms  were  generally  smaller,  fruit,  vegetables,  poultry,  fresh 
butter,  and  other  articles  for  immediate  consumption  were  found  profitable  and 
occupied  much  attention.  Scarcely  a  farm  was  to  be  found  without  its  apple 
orchard  of  choice  and  selected  varieties.  Chester  County,  especially,  was 
constantly  held  up  by  the  agricultural  papers  and  periodicals  of  the  time  as  a 
striking  example  of  the  “  improved  system  ”  of  agriculture ;  in  particular  it 
was  noted  for  the  feeding  of  western  cattle.  The  adjoining  county  of  Delaware 
was  famed  for  the  quantity  and  quality  of  the  fresh  butter,  veal,  and  poultry 
which  it  furnished  to  the  Philadelphia  market.  Both  counties  were  praised  for 
their  clean  and  well-arranged  farms,  for  the  well-built  fences  that  divided  the 
farms  into  7  to  12  inclosures,  for  the  well-constructed  farm  buildings  located, 
where  practicable,  in  the  immediate  vicinity  of  a  spring. 

3  Cultivator ,  new  series,  VI  (1849),  P-  298. 

4  N.  Y.  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions,  II  (1842),  187. 

5  Ibid.,  I  (1841),  p.  168. 


262 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


THE  PENNSYLVANIA  BARNS. 

The  barns  were  large  enough  to  permit  the  storage  of  all  the  produce  of  the 
farm,  the  livestock,  and  the  tools.  Writing  in  1843,  Trego  reports  : 6 

“  The  traveller  in  older  settled  parts  of  Pennsylvania  is  particularly  struck  with  the 
neat  and  substantial  appearance  of  the  buildings,  fences,  etc.,  as  well  as  the  order  and 
convenience  of  the  whole  domestic  arrangements  of  a  well  regulated  farm.  The  pride 
of  a  Pennsylvania  farmer  is  his  barn,  many  of  which  are  from  60  to  120  feet  in  length 
and  substantially  built,  either  wholly  of  stone,  or  the  lower  story  of  stone  and  the 
superstructure  of  wood,  handsomely  painted  or  white-washed.  The  interior  arrangement 
of  stables,  thrashing  floors,  granaries,  places  for  depositing  hay,  etc.,  is  admirably  con¬ 
venient  and  useful.  The  horses,  cattle  and  other  domestic  animals  are  comfortably 
sheltered  during  the  winter,  and  like  their  master  and  his  family,  enjoy  the  plenty  pro¬ 
vided  by  good  husbandry  and  provident  industry.  Within  the  last  few  years  consider¬ 
able  attention  has  been  given  to  improving  the  stock  of  domestic  animals;  a  subject 
which  has  been  too  much  neglected  by  our  farmers." 

LACK  OF  PROGRESS  IN  MARYLAND  AND  IN  DELAWARE. 

The  Chester  County  system  of  farming  was  also  carried  on  in  central  New 
Jersey  and  northern  Delaware,  and  to  a  limited  extent  in  Maryland.  But  in  the 
latter  State,  as  in  Virginia,  continued  cropping  to  wheat,  corn,  or  tobacco, 
together  with  the  failure  to  keep  much  livestock,  had  so  greatly  reduced  the 
fertility  of  the  soil  that  it  was  widely  proclaimed  that  there  was  no  longer 
profit  in  farming.  While  the  States  to  the  North  had  greatly  improved  their 
agriculture  by  1840,  Maryland  and  Delaware  had  made  but  little  progress.  A 
common  practice  in  the  tobacco  region  of  the  west  shore  of  Maryland  was  to 
cut  down  and  clear  as  much  land  during  the  winter  as  could  be  planted  in  to¬ 
bacco  the  following  spring,  and  to  continue  that  crop  on  the  land  until  it  would 
no  longer  raise  tobacco.  Then  wheat,  corn,  and  oats  were  grown  until  they 
were  no  longer  profitable,  and  finally  the  land  was  thrown  out  as  “  old  fields.” 
While  one  piece  of  land  was  in  the  course  of  exhaustion,  another  tract  was 
cleared  and  treated  in  the  same  manner.  Shallow  plowing  was  said  to  be  one 
of  the  most  prominent  defects  in  Maryland  agriculture.7  Gideon  Smith  thus 
expressed  his  opinion  of  the  agriculture  of  Maryland  in  1842: 

“  The  crops  are  generally  inferior  in  quantity  to  those  of  the  northern  states.  There 

are  exceptions,  it  is  true,  but  they  are  mere  exceptions .  It  is  believed  that  the 

average  yield  of  corn  per  acre  will  not  exceed  twenty  bushels,  and  that  of  wheat  not 
twelve ;  and  that  the  average  profits  of  agriculture  in  the  state  will  not  exceed  three 
per  cent  on  the  capital  invested.”  8 

THE  MIDDLE  REGION.— WHEAT  AND  ITS  MANAGEMENT. 

Western  New  York,  the  western  counties  of  Pennsylvania,  and  eastern 
Ohio  was  the  leading  wheat-growing  region  of  the  North  in  1840.  Wheat, 
sheep,  and  cattle  were  the  leading  sources  of  income.  Dairying  was  rapidly 
developing  in  the  Western  Reserve  of  Ohio  and  in  a  few  counties  of  western 
New  York.  The  opening  of  the  Erie  Canal  in  1825  and  of  the  eastern  Ohio 
Canal  in  1832  had  given  an  outlet  to  eastern  markets  to  the  farmers  of  western 

6  Geography  of  Pennsylvania ,  112. 

7  N.  Y.  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions ,  II  (1842),  p.  225. 

8  Ibid.,  p.  223. 


NORTHERN  AGRICULTURE  IN  1840 


263 


New  York  and  of  eastern  Ohio.  Large  quantities  of  cheese  were  annually 
exported  through  the  Erie  Canal  to  the  East,  and  also  carried  by  canals  and 
rivers  to  the  South,  and  by  the  Great  Lakes  to  the  West. 

In  1840,  Ohio  led  the  States  in  wheat  production.  Summer  fallowing,  which 
in  the  northeastern  States  had  largely  ceased  by  1840,  was  a  characteristic 
feature  of  the  cropping  system.  This  ancient  practice  had  already  passed  from 
New  England,  and  with  the  rapid  development  of  dairying  it  was  rapidly 
disappearing  from  the  region  of  the  Mohawk  Valley.  In  the  prairie  region 
it  did  not  prevail  to  any  wide  extent.  The  earlier  practice  of  bare  fallow  from 
April  to  seeding  time,  however,  had  been  largely  abandoned.  It  was  now 
usual  to  begin  the  fallow  by  plowing  under  a  crop  of  clover,  peas,  or  a  pas¬ 
ture  sod  during  the  last  of  June,  to  plow  again  in  August,  and  again  about 
the  first  of  September,  and  then  to  sow  the  wheat  and  harrow  it  in.  In  western 
New  York  it  was  not  uncommon  to  take  two  or  three  crops  of  wheat  from  the 
same  field  with  only  a  fallow  intervening.  Then  the  land  was  seeded  with 
clover  which  was  mowed  or  pastured  for  2  or  3  years,  after  which  the  land 
was  again  seeded  to  wheat.  On  the  newer  and  richer  lands  of  eastern  Ohio 
some  farmers  were  producing  wheat  in  a  rotation  of  wheat,  corn,  and  oats, 
without  fallow  or  manure.  Others  were  sowing  wheat  after  wheat  for  a  succes¬ 
sion  of  years  with  only  an  occasional  crop  of  corn  intervening.  However,  more 
attention  to  rotation  and  the  application  of  manure  began  to  be  evident.  Gyp¬ 
sum  was  extensively  used  on  clover  and  wheat.  Drainage  and  suboil  plowing 
were  much  discussed  and  sometimes  practiced. 

THE  WEST. 

There  were  over  a  million  people  living  in  the  States  of  Indiana  and  Illinois 
in  1840,  200,000  in  Michigan,  and  31,000  in  Wisconsin.  West  of  the  Mississ¬ 
ippi  River,  Missouri  had  a  population  of  380,000,  and  Iowa  had  about  45,000 
settlers,  mostly  living  along  the  river.  (See  fig.  33,  p.  277.)  The  total  popula¬ 
tion  living  west  of  Ohio  was  only  slightly  greater  than  the  population  of  that 
State.  The  population  of  Ohio  was  only  three-fifths  that  of  New  York  State. 
The  total  area  of  improved  land  in  farms  in  the  territory  of  Indiana,  Illinois, 
Michigan,  Wisconsin,  Iowa,  and  Minnesota  was  only  slightly  greater  than 
that  of  New  York  State  alone.  While  the  agriculture  of  the  East  was  under¬ 
going  a  change  in  character,  the  West  was  entering  upon  a  period  of  rapid 
expansion  of  the  area  of  land  in  use.  In  1840,  the  chief  region  of  production 
in  the  West  extended  along  the  Ohio  and  Illinois  Rivers  and  northward  along 
the  Mississippi  and  westward  along  the  lower  course  of  the  Missouri  River. 
The  open  prairie  to  the  north  was  as  yet  hardly  entered,  for  settlement  had 
held  close  to  the  woods  and  rivers.  The  early  settlements  along  the  Ohio  and 
lower  Missouri  and  the  Mississippi  Rivers  had  benefited  by  cheap  transporta¬ 
tion  to  southern  markets.  Southern  Michigan,  at  the  western  end  of  Lake 
Erie,  was  now  attracting  settlers.  Railroads  had  not  as  yet  been  built. 

Because  of  the  distance  of  markets  and  the  lack  of  means  of  transportation, 
agriculture  was  chiefly  of  a  self-sufficing  character.  The  pioneer  farmer  had 
only  recently  cleared  his  farm  from  the  wilderness,  or  perhaps  was  still 
engaged  in  that  task.  He  still  produced  his  own  meat  and  grain,  and  much  of 
his  clothing,  with  the  implements  which  he  had  at  hand,  while  outside  work, 


264 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


or  the  sale  of  a  few  hogs  or  cattle  or  wheat  or  corn,  procured  salt  and  other 
bare  necessities  of  life. 

FARMING  IN  KENTUCKY  AND  MISSOURI. 

In  a  few  centers  in  the  West,  however,  a  thriving  commercial  agriculture 
had  already  developed.  The  vicinity  of  Cincinnati,  Ohio,  including  the  Blue- 
grass  region  of  Kentucky,  was  the  leading  agricultural  district.  Just  as 
Chester  County,  Pennsylvania,  was  regarded  as  the  model  of  improved  agricul¬ 
ture  in  the  East,  so  the  limestone  region  of  Kentucky  was  famous  in  the  West 
as  the  center  of  prosperous  and  contented  agriculture.  Its  bluegrass  pastures 
were  widely  known,  and  its  wealthy  farmers,  who  raised  corn,  hogs,  and  mules 
and  grazed  large  herds  of  Shorthorn  catle  and  saddle  horses.  The  agriculture 
of  western  Kentucky  was  of  a  type  decidedly  different  from  that  of  the  blue- 
grass  region.  Crops  were  scanty.  The  inhabitants  lived  almost  entirely  on  the 
scanty  production  of  their  rough  fields,  breeding  a  few  scrub  steers,  making 
baskets,  burning  out  tar,  and  digging  ginseng  root.9  West  of  the  Mississippi 
River  there  was  a  small  center  of  commercial  agriculture  along  the  lower 
Missouri  River.  Corn,  swine  and  cattle,  with  hemp  and  tobacco  in  Kentucky 
and  tobacco  and  mules  in  Missouri,  were  the  leading  sources  of  income  in  these 
regions.  In  southeastern  Ohio,  western  Kentucky,  and  central  Missouri 
tobacco  was  extensively  produced.  Nearly  6,000,000  pounds  of  tobacco  were 
raised  in  Ohio  in  1840,  almost  entirely  in  the  southeastern  counties. 

CORN  AND  CATTLE  FATTENING. 

The  corn-producing  region  of  the  North,,  in  1840,  comprised  central  Ken¬ 
tucky,  southwestern  Ohio,  central  Indiana  and  Illinois  and  later  southeastern 
Iowa,  and  the  lower  valley  of  the  Missouri.  (See  fig.  74,  p.  339.)  Climatic 
conditions  were  suitable  to  the  crop,  and  the  fertile,  easily  worked,  river-bottom 
lands  seldom  failed  to  produce  a  large  yield.  So  rich  were  they,  indeed,  that 
often  wheat  could  not  be  grown  upon  them  profitably  for  several  years  after 
breaking,  because  the  rank  growth  of  straw  caused  lodging  and  made  the  crop 
especially  liable  to  attacks  of  rust.  But  large  crops  of  corn  were  frequently 
grown  for  30  years  in  succession.  The  Mississippi,  the  Ohio,  and  the  Missouri 
Rivers,  and  their  numerous  important  tributaries,  such  as  the  Scioto,  the 
Wabash  and  the  Illinois,  not  only  furnished  in  their  bottoms  the  richest  corn 
ground,  but  also  afforded  an  outlet  for  the  crop  to  the  market  which  was  rapid¬ 
ly  developing  in  the  South.  The  Scioto  Valley  had  become  the  Western  feeding 
center  for  fat  cattle  to  be  driven  to  the  East.  The  large  quantity  of  corn 
which  could  be  produced  with  a  small  amount  of  labor,  the  market  for  the 
grain  in  the  South,  the  fact  that  pork  production  required  only  corn  and 
clover  and  a  few  oats  and  peas,  and  that  beef  could  be  raised  on  corn  and 
the  open  prairie,  with  a  little  clover  and  timothy,  all  combined  to  make  corn  a 
favored  crop.  Cattle  pastured  on  the  prairies,  partially  fattened  on  corn,  and 
driven  East,  were  a  leading  source  of  income.  Swine  and  the  manufacture 
of  whisky  consumed  much  of  the  surplus  corn,  which,  in  its  original  form, 
would  not  bear  the  cost  of  transportation  to  market. 


9  Country  Gentleman,  VIII  (1856),  p.  121. 


NORTHERN  AGRICULTURE  IN  1840 


265 


Wheat-growing,  however,  was  by  no  means  neglected  in  the  West.  In  1840, 
southwestern  Ohio  and  southeastern  Indiana  raised  notable  crops  of  wheat. 
Michigan  was  beginning  to  attract  attention  as  a  wheat-growing  State,  and  the 
settlers  moving  into  Wisconsin  were  turning  their  attention  largely  to  this 
grain. 

While  a  few  small  areas,  such  as  that  around  Cincinnati  and  in  the  Bluegrass 
region  of  Kentucky,  had  a  well-developed  agriculture  by  1840,  the  farming  west 
of  the  Alleghenies  was  distinctly  of  the  pioneer  type,  characterized  by  limited 
markets  and  capital,  abundant  land,  and  the  absence  of  intensive  farming. 
The  prairie  country  had  nearly  all  been  left  for  future  settlement.  A  study  of 
the  maps  showing  the  distribution  of  population  and  of  the  crops  and  live¬ 
stock  shows  that  northwestern  Ohio,  northern  Indiana,  northern  Illinois,  and 
northern  Wisconsin  were  sparsely  populated  in  1840.  Population  had  thus 
far  followed  the  rivers  and  wooded  regions  and  avoided  the  prairies,  but  the 
latter  were  now  attracting  attention  and  were  destined  to  wield  a  powerful 
influence  upon  the  future  progress  and  character  of  American  agriculture. 

The  western  pioneer  was  living  in  a  dynamic  age.  Crops  were  in  a  measure 
untried.  No  one  could  say  whether  the  western  farmer  would  best  produce 
grass  or  fruit,  corn  or  wheat,  sheep,  hogs,  or  cattle.  The  new  territory  with 
its  unknown  possibilities  of  soil,  climate,  healthfulness  and  markets  was  now 
being  occupied  by  a  generation  of  men  many  of  whom  had  seen  the  pioneer 
emerge  from  a  forest-covered  area  to  the  prairies,  where  an  abundance  of 
fertile  land  lay  ready  for  the  plow.  High  expectations  were  held  of  the  results 
which  would  follow  the  development  of  agricultural  machinery,  cheaper  trans¬ 
portation,  and  the  connection  of  science  with  agricultural  practice.  Immigrants 
were  coming  from  the  wheat,  corn,  and  fruit-growing  regions  of  the  East 
and  South,  from  the  dairying  and  sheep-raising  regions  of  the  East,  from  the 
hemp  and  tobacco-growing  regions  of  the  South,  and  from  various  countries 
of  Europe.  To  many  the  new  situation  seemed  to  afford  boundless  opportuni¬ 
ties,  but  others  were  doubtful  and  uncertain.  The  distance  from  markets  and 
the  high  cost  of  transportation  limited  the  sales  of  the  farmers  to  products 
of  high  specific  value.  A  period  of  severe  depression  and  low  prices  had  fol¬ 
lowed  the  panic  of  1837.  The  lack  of  means  of  the  majority  of  immigrants, 
together  with  the  wealth  of  the  productive  soil,  favored  the  production  of 
such  commodities  as  derived  a  large  part  of  their  cost  from  the  land  and  as 
afforded  most  immediate  profit.  Farmers  and  immigrants  were  all  asking  what 
they  could  raise  that  would  sell. 


Chapter  XXL — The  Influence  of  the  Prairies  on 

the  Progress  of  Agriculture. 

If  one  reads  an  account  of  the  agricultural  history  of  England  during  the 
middle  years  of  the  nineteenth  century,  and  then  turns  to  the  records  of 
American  agriculture  during  the  same  period,  he  must  be  impressed  with  the 
very  evident  fact  that  those  features  regarded  as  distinctive  and  characteristic 
of  agricultural  organization  in  the  northern  portion  of  the  United  States  during 
this  period  had  their  foundation  largely  in  the  presence  of  an  abundant,  avail¬ 
able  supply  of  practically  free  but  fertile  land.  Extensive  farming,  soil 
exploitation  and  the  development  of  farm  machinery  were  outstanding  char¬ 
acteristics  of  American  agriculture.  The  westward  expansion  of  settlement 
and  agricultural  production  was  a  dominant  feature  of  the  period. 

The  preemption  act  of  September  4,  1841,  was  the  most  important  legislation 
of  the  period  affecting  the  disposal  of  the  public  lands  of  the  West.  Heretofore 
land  had  been  sold  at  public  auction;  the  act  of  1841,  however,  allowed  actual 
settlers  to  buy  their  land  at  private  sale  at  the  minimum  price  of  $1.25  per  acre. 
This  method  of  sale  prevailed  throughout  the  period  and  until  the  passage  of 
the  homestead  act  of  1861.  Tracts  as  small  as  80  acres  could  be  purchased. 
After  1850,  railroad  lands  were  also  placed  in  the  market.  The  emigrant  to 
the  West  could  now  select  and  buy  his  farm  as  soon  as  he  arrived. 

Until  about  1830,  the  extension  of  the  region  of  agricultural  production  into 
the  “  west  ”  had  been  largely  through  a  forest-covered  region.  At  the  begin¬ 
ning  of  the  century  a  nearly  unbroken  forest  extended  from  the  Atlantic  coast 
westward  to  the  far  end  of  Lake  Erie  on  the  north  and  beyond  the  Mississippi 
on  the  south.  In  the  settlement  of  western  Pennsylvania  and  New  York, 
eastern  Ohio,  Kentucky,  southern  Indiana,  and  southern  Illinois  the  first  task 
of  the  immigrant  in  the  production  of  crops  was  the  clearing  of  the  land  of 
brush  and  trees.  The  fertile  limestone  region  of  Kentucky  and  the  bottom 
lands  of  the  Ohio,  when  first  occupied  by  the  pioneer,  were  covered  with 
large  timber,  beneath  which  was  an  undergrowth  “  plentifully  interspersed 
with  briers  and  thorns.”  To  grub  the  trees  and  remove  the  undergrowth  was 
a  laborious  task.1  Many  years  of  hardship  and  toil  were  required  before 
enough  land  was  cleared  to  maintain  a  family.  The  first  year  “  a  patch,”  per¬ 
haps,  was  cleared  for  potatoes  and  corn,  the  next  year  a  field  for  wheat. 
Even  after  the  trees  were  felled  and  burned,  the  stumps  and  roots  remained 
to  interfere  with  the  plow  and  harrow.  Fifteen  or  even  20  years  were  com¬ 
monly  estimated  as  the  period  of  time  elapsing  between  the  deadening  of  the 
trees  and  the  disappearance  of  the  logs  from  the  fields ;  to  open  a  farm  of  a 
hundred  acres  was  the  work  of  years.2 

1  Beddall,  Blue  Grass  Region  of  Kentucky,  90. 

2  Howells,  Recollections,  1 15 ;  Beddall,  Blue  Grass  Region  of  Kentucky,  90;  Beatty, 

Essays,  62-69;  American  Farmer,  II  (1820-21),  p.  130. 

266 


INFLUENCE  OF  PRAIRIES  ON  PROGRESS  OF  AGRICULTURE  267 

THE  OAK  OPENINGS  AND  SMALL  PRAIRIES. 

By  1840  the  movement  westward  had  emerged  from  the  timber  and  had 
reached  the  prairie  region.  (See  fig.  33,  p.  277.)  Many  of  the  small  prairies 
of  Ohio  and  Indiana  adjacent  to  rivers  and  timber  had  already  been  settled, 
including  the  prairies  of  Stark  County,  the  leading  wheat  county  of  Ohio, 
which  were  first  farmed  about  1833. 3 4  Ellsworth,  in  his  Valley  of  the  Upper 
Wabash  (1838),  stated  that  only  within  the  last  few  years  had  the  settlement 
of  the  small  prairies  of  that  region  begun.  Oak  openings,  the  small  prairies, 
and  the  large  prairies  adjacent  to  timber  in  Michigan,  Indiana,  Wisconsin, 
Illinois,  and  Missouri  were  then  being  settled.  Here  the  expense  of  develop¬ 
ing  a  farm  was  considerably  less  than  in  the  forest  region.  Southern  Mich¬ 
igan,  typical  of  much  of  the  region  settled  during  this  period,  was  thus  de¬ 
scribed  by  a  resident  in  1847 :  4 

“  These  portions  of  Michigan  which  are  classed  as  *  openings/  are  usually  a  beautifully 
varied  country,  sparsely  timbered,  chiefly  with  oaks.  Among  the  several  species  of  these, 
the  white  is  predominant,  and  has  the  largest  growth ;  next  the  black  or  yellow  and 
burr  oaks.  Hickory  is  often  intermixed  to  a  considerable  extent.  What  are  called 
‘plains/  resemble  the  openings  but  have  less  timber,  and  are  often  almost  destitute, 
approaching  the  character  of  ‘  prairies.’  Somewhat  more  than  half  of  the  peninsula 
consists  of  openings  and  plains,  and  these  are  occasionally  varied  by  tracts  of  heavily 
timbered  land,  and  by  prairies  destitute  of  timber.  The  latter  are  not  frequent,  and  are 
of  much  less  extent  than  the  prairies  of  Illinois,  comprising  from  a  few  acres  to  15,000 
acres.  ‘  Marshes/  or  wet  prairies  frequently  occupy  the  hollow  and  level  spots  of  the 
openings  and  plains,  and  consist  of  an  accumulation  of  peat  and  vegetable  matter, 

producing  a  rank  growth  of  wild  grasses .  These  grasses  are  relished  by  all 

kinds  of  cattle,  and  are  so  abundant  and  esteemed  that  in  many  parts  of  the  country 
they  constitute  the  only  winter  fodder  of  cattle,  horses,  and  sheep.  Many  farmers  think 

them  preferable  to  any  of  the  cultivated  grasses,  for  all  kinds  of  stock . To  new 

settlers  these  marshes  have  proved  invaluable,  by  enabling  them  from  the  first  to  sup¬ 
port  their  stock  with  scarcely  any  cost.” 

The  timbered  openings  comprised  the  larger  part  of  the  land  under  cultiva¬ 
tion  in  Michigan  before  1847.5  The  openings  of  Dane  County,  Wisconsin, 
have  been  described  as 

“  Immense  ‘  orchards  ’  of  stately  oaks — usually  the  burr  oak — standing  well  apart,  their 
superb  tops  spreading  over  a  radius  of  forty  or  fifty  feet,  yet  with  plenty  of  room  for 
wind  and  sunshine  between,  favoring  the  presence  of  prairie  grasses  or  hazel  brush.”  6 

Frequently  there  were  but  two  or  three  dozen  oak  trees  to  the  acre,  the 
ground  beneath  being  covered  with  oak  and  hazel  brush,  with  an  indifferent 
show  of  prairie  grasses.  In  other  places  the  ground  was  free  from  underbrush, 
except  at  the  edges  of  the  timber,  where  the  hazel  brush  seemed  to  be  an 
advance  guard  constantly  encroaching  on  the  prairie.  The  “  barrens  ”  of  Iowa 
were  about  half-way  between  prairie  and  timber  land,  the  trees  standing  apart 
like  an  orchard,  the  ground  beneath  being  covered  with  grass,  the  sod  of 
which  was  much  less  tough  than  that  on  the  prairie.  The  land  in  these  oak 
openings  and  plains  was  usually  broken  “  by  powerful  ox-teams  hitched  to 
plows  of  immense  proportions,  and  only  occasionally  was  it  necessary  to  turn 
aside  from  some  oak,  or  to  use  grub-hoe  and  axe  to  remove  roots  too  large  or 

8  Klippart,  The  Wheat  Plant,  343. 

4  Cultivator,  new  series,  IV  (1847),  p.  270. 

5  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report,  1847,  p.  405. 

0  Hibbard,  Agriculture  in  Dane  County,  Wisconsin,  83. 


268 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


too  hard  to  be  cut  by  the  share.”  7  Much  of  the  labor  necessary  during  the 
previous  decades  in  clearing  the  underbrush  and  timber  before  the  crop 
could  be  planted  was  now  avoided.  In  southern  Michigan  and  Wisconsin 
and  in  northern  Ohio  and  Indiana  the  timber  land,  openings,  and  small  prairies 
were  generally  intermixed ;  but  west  of  Ohio,  larger  prairies  were  found,  and 
the  timber  areas  were  smaller.  The  northern  and  east-central  portion  of 
Illinois  was  largely  prairie  with  very  little  timber.8  The  timber  usually  skirted 
the  rivers  and  small  water-courses  or  was  scattered  through  the  prairie  in 
groves. 

WHY  HAD  EARLIER  SETTLERS  AVOIDED  THE  PRAIRIES? 

Settlement  in  the  prairie  region  before  about  1850  had  taken  place  in  the 
openings,  on  the  smaller  prairies,  or  near  the  junction  of  prairie  and  timber, 
but  the  open  prairie  had  been  generally  avoided.9  The  numerous  groves  and 
the  timbered  land  bordering  the  rivers  and  creeks  of  the  prairie  region  had 
been  favorite  locations  for  settlers,  although,  as  early  as  1845,  a  few  of  the 
more  venturesome  had  gone  far  into  the  prairies.10  The  appearance  of  the 
prairie  near  Peoria,  Illinois,  was  thus  described  in  1849 : 11 

“  We  went  up  on  ‘  Holbrook’s  knoll/  a  height  a  short  distance  southwest  of  the 
present  village  of  Waterman,  and  from  that  elevated  point  surveyed  the  land.  South¬ 
ward  an  immense  tract  of  treeless,  undulating  prairie,  dotted  by  scattered  cabins  near  the 
timber,  was  spread  out  before  us,  the  view  bounded  by  Shabbona  Grove,  Pritchard’s 
Grove  and  Ross  Grove  to  the  right,  by  Indian  Creek  timber  in  front  and  by  Somonawk 
timber  to  the  left.  Eastward  was  Squaw  Grove  and  northward  was  the  boundless 
prairie,  the  view  in  that  direction  unbroken  by  house  or  tree  so  far  as  the  eye  could 
reach.” 

Idealists  and  practical  men  differed  regarding  the  ultimate  usefulness  of  the 
Illinois  prairies  for  agricultural  purposes.  Some  thought  that  they  had  been 
especially  reserved  for  the  agricultural  millennium  which  was  now  about  to 
dawn ;  others  that  they  would  not  be  brought  into  cultivation  for  centuries  to 
come.  One  urged  speculators  to  buy  up  the  centers  of  the  large  prairies  and 
plant  them  with  trees.12  Another  writes :  “  I  have  not  a  single  doubt  that 
Illinois  alone,  is  capable  of  sustaining  a  population  of  twenty  millions.”  13  The 
great  objection  to  the  prairies  as  a  place  of  settlement  during  the  early  years 
was  the  absence  of  wood  and  water.  Roads  into  the  prairies  were  nearly 
impassable  in  the  spring  because  of  the  deep  mud.  It  was  difficult  to  make  the 
wooden-moldboard  plow,  or  even  the  cast-iron  plow,  do  satisfactory  work  in 
prairie  soils.  It  is  said  that  immigrants  from  the  wooded  regions  of  the  East 
and  South,  or  from  foreign  countries,  frequently  chose  timber  land,  because 
it  resembled  the  country  from  which  they  came.  In  the  eyes  of  many  an 
eastern  traveler  the  lack  of  stone  material  for  building  was  a  serious  deficiency. 
The  fever  and  ague  also  were  frequently  urged  as  reasons  for  avoiding  the 
prairies.  It  was  thought  by  some  that  for  farmers  without  capital  the  timbered 

7  Hibbard,  Agriculture  in  Dane  County ,  Wisconsin ,  84. 

8  Gerhard,  Illinois  As  It  Is,  276. 

9  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Reports,  1850,  Agriculture,  403. 

10  Ibid.,  1845,  P-  388. 

11  Marsh,  Recollections,  1837-1910,  p.  36. 

12  Sears,  Pictorial  Description  of  the  United  States,  548. 

13  Western  Farmer,  I  (1839),  P-  147. 


INFLUENCE  OF  PRAIRIES  ON  PROGRESS  OF  AGRICULTURE  269 


land  was  the  better ;  but  that,  when  capital  was  added,  the  openings  and  plains 
were  preferable.14  Of  the  many  reasons  advanced  for  avoiding  the  prairies, 
that  which  was  most  often  repeated  by  contemporary  writers,  was  the  lack  of 
wood  and  water. 

So  long  as  land  was  available  for  settlement  on  the  smaller  prairies  or  along 
the  edge  of  the  timber,  the  newly-arrived  immigrant  was  able  to  provide  him¬ 
self  with  a  farm  consisting  of  both  wood  and  prairie  land.  The  timber  land 
furnished  him  fuel  and  fencing  material,  lumber  for  his  buildings,  mast  for 
his  hogs,  and  protection  from  winds  and  storms.  The  adjacent  prairies  pro¬ 
vided  tillable  land,  abundant  range  for  cattle,  and  a  supply  of  winter  forage 
free  for  the  gathering.  As  soon  as  settlement  broke  away  from  the  timber, 
it  was  necessary  for  the  farmer  on  the  open  prairie  to  carry  the  material  for 
fuel,  fencing,  and  buildings  from  the  timbered  land. 

There  was  much  difference  of  opinion  regarding  the  relative  advantages  of 
woodland  and  of  the  prairie  for  a  new  settler.  Judge  Hall,  in  his  Notes  on  the 
Western  States  (1838)  wrote:15 

“  A  farmer  had  better  settle  in  the  midst  of  a  prairie,  and  haul  his  fuel  and  rails  five 
miles,  than  undertake  to  clear  a  farm  in  the  forest.  The  farmers  of  Illinois  are  beginning 
to  be  aware  of  this  fact,  and  there  are  now  many  instances  in  which  farmers,  having 
purchased  a  small  piece  of  land  for  timber,  in  the  woodland,  make  their  farm  at  a 
distance  in  the  prairie.” 

This  seems  to  have  been  more  frequently  the  opinion  of  travelers,  however, 
than  of  actual  settlers.  The  open  prairie  furnished  no  protection  from  the 
wind  and  storms. 

To  supply  drinking-water  for  man  and  beast  was  another  perplexing  prob¬ 
lem  of  the  prairie  farmer.  At  a  distance  from  rivers  or  springs,  he  had  to 
rely  mainly  for  water  upon  wells,  but  rock  and  timber  were  scarce  and  wells 
must  be  driven  deep,  with  no  other  implements  except  picks  and  shovels. 
Under  such  conditions  well-digging  was  indeed  a  difficult  task.  Consequently, 
the  introduction  of  well-drilling  machinery  was  of  great  importance  in  later 
stages  of  prairie  settlement. 

During  the  decade  1840  to  1850,  farming  in  the  prairie  region  had  returned 
but  small  profits.  Although  western  farmers  might  raise  4  bushels  of  wheat  or 
corn  or  4  pounds  of  beef  or  pork  as  cheaply  as  the  eastern  farmer  could  raise 
1  pound,  yet  the  1  bushel  or  pound  at  the  East  brought  more  money  than 
the  4  in  the  West.  During  much  of  this  time  the  interior  farmer  could  not 
sell  any  of  the  products  of  his  farm  at  his  home  for  cash  at  any  price,  and 
the  cost  of  transportation  to  a  cash  market  was  in  many  instances  equal  to  their 
entire  value.  Under  such  conditions  it  is  not  surprising  that  the  settlers  in  the 
prairie  regions  were  reluctant  to  leave  the  vicinity  of  the  wooded  region,  which 
supplied  them  with  the  necessities — timber,  water,  and  protection — to  take  up 
land  in  the  open  prairie,  with  its  uncertain  returns. 

CONDITIONS  FAVORING  SETTLEMENT  OF  PRAIRIES 

AFTER  1840. 

Many  causes  were  leading  to  the  settlement  of  the  prairies,  however.  As  a 
result  of  the  rapidly  increasing  tide  of  immigration  to  the  West,  nearly  all 


14  Blois,  Gazetteer  of  Michigan  (1838),  p.  27. 

15  Hall,  Notes  on  the  Western  States,  103. 


270  AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 

the  available  land  surrounding  the  large  prairies  in  the  older  settled  region 
east  of  the  Mississippi  had  been  taken  by  actual  settlers,  or  by  speculators 
before  1850.  It  was  now  becoming  necessary,  in  order  to  obtain  productive 
land,  either  to  go  still  farther  west  in  search  of  the  favorite  mixture  of  wood¬ 
land  and  prairie,  or  to  break  away  from  the  timber.  The  prices  of  wheat,  corn, 
beeves,  and  hogs  in  western  markets  had  begun  about  1845  to  show  a  rising 
tendency.  (See  pp.  312  et  seq.)  The  reaper  was  coming  into  use,  allowing 
the  farmer  to  harvest  more  extensive  fields  of  grain  and  putting  a  premium 
on  the  open,  level,  prairie-lands.  The  steel  plow  which  would  scour  in  the 
prairie  soil  was  taking  the  place  of  the  cast-iron  plow.16  It  was  the  building 
of  the  railroads  across  the  prairie  region  during  the  decade  1850  to  i860, 
however,  that  opened  the  prairies  to  profitable  agricultural  production.  Better 
markets  were  now  provided,  the  demand  for  wheat  and  corn  land  increased, 
returns  were  more  certain.  Fuel  and  building  material  might  now  be  secured 
from  Chicago  or  from  the  timbered  regions  by  railroad.  Finally,  the  high 
prices  of  wheat  during  the  middle  years  of  the  decade  at  once  overcame  all 
prejudice  to  any  land  with  available  markets  which  would  produce  that  crop. 
Former  objections  dwindled  in  importance  and  settlement  spread  over  the 
open  prairies. 

With  the  development  of  prairie  agriculture,  the  progress  of  settlement  in 
the  wooded  regions  was  somewhat  checked.  The  woodlands  were  now  passed 
by.  There  was  talk  of  abandoned  farms  in  the  East.  Emigrants  from  New 
York  and  New  England  who  had  settled  in  the  wooded  region  of  eastern  Ohio 
now  moved  further  west  to  take  up  a  prairie  farm  in  Illinois,  Wisconsin,  or 
Iowa.  Between  1830  and  1840  the  State  of  Michigan  had  come  into  being  and 
the  Territory  of  Wisconsin  and  Iowa  had  been  created.  The  removal  of  the 
Sacs  and  Foxes  from  northern  Illinois  and  Wisconsin  opened  that  region  to 
pioneers.  Between  1850  and  i860  Iowa  was  admitted  to  the  Union  as  a  State 
and  the  Territories  of  Minnesota,  Nebraska,  and  Kansas  were  organized. 

PIONEERING  ON  THE  PRAIRIES. 

In  contrast  to  pioneering  in  the  wooded  regions,  the  prairie  farmer  had  no 
brush  to  grub  or  timber  to  cut  before  planting  his  crops.  A  thick  grass  sward 
covered  the  soil  and,  although  it  required  the  strength  of  3,  4,  or  even  6 
yoke  of  oxen  to  break  the  sod  for  the  first  time,  within  2  or  3  years  it  was 
cultivated  with  the  same  ease  as  other  lands.  Arriving  in  the  spring,  at  the 
expense  of  only  one  plowing  and  a  thorough  harrowing,  the  emigrant  with 
good  fortune  might  obtain  a  crop  of  sod  corn  and  potatoes  the  first  year,  and  a 
crop  of  wheat,  barley,  or  oats  the  second,  from  as  large  a  portion  of  his  land 
as  his  means  would  enable  him  to  bring  under  the  plow.  Its  freedom  from 
stumps,  stones,  and  falling  branches  enabled  him  to  avail  himself  of  all  the 
varieties  of  machinery  used  in  farming,  such  as  planters,  drills,  reapers,  and 
mowers. 

COST  OF  DEVELOPING  A  PRAIRIE  FARM. 

To  the  newly-arrived  immigrant  in  the  prairie  region  the  cost  of  developing 
a  farm  was  a  matter  of  first  importance.  Having  generally  but  limited  means, 


16  Prairie  Farmer,  XI  (1851),  p.  10. 


INFLUENCE  OF  PRAIRIES  ON  PROGRESS  OF  AGRICULTURE  271 


he  was  compelled  to  get  all  he  could  from  the  land  with  the  least  possible 
outlay.  Time  was  the  important  element  in  the  development  of  a  farm  in 
the  wooded  region,  but  when  the  prairies  were  reached  and  a  farm  could  be 
developed  in  one  year,  capital  and  markets  were  of  greater  importance. 
Caird ir  gives  the  following  account  of  the  process  of  settlement  in  the 
prairies : 

“  The  first  care  of  an  American  Settler  on  the  prairie  is  to  provide  for  the  first  winter. 
If  he  starts  in  May  he  ploughs  a  few  acres  up,  and  very  commonly  plants  the  Indian 
corn  on  it  by  making  a  slit  with  his  axe  on  the  tough  upturned  sod,  into  which  he  drops 

the  seed .  Having  thus  started  his  ‘  sod  ’  corn,  he  constructs  his  house,  and 

spends  the  rest  of  the  summer  in  *  breaking  ’  the  prairie  in  preparation  for  a  wheat 
crop,  and  in  cutting  and  making  some  prairie  hay  for  the  winter  provender  of  his  live 

stock .  In  the  end  of  August  he  sows  his  wheat,  and,  when  that  is  completed, 

he  harvests  his  ‘  sod  ’  corn .  When  the  crop  of  Indian  corn  is  secured  there  is 

time  to  begin  making  fences .  The  fences  are  made  of  posts  and  sawn  pine 

timber,  ....  the  material  being  secured  at  either  the  nearest  railway  station  or  grove 
of  timber.” 

Solon  Robinson,18  of  Lake  County,  Indiana,  in  1843  gave  the  cost  of  starting 
a  prairie  farm  as  follows : 

“  The  first  breaking  up  of  the  prairie  is  generally  counted  in  the  cost  of  preparation ; 
that  is  $1.50  an  acre;  rails,  one  cent  each;  count  16  or  18  for  every  rod,  and  calculate 
the  expense  of  any  sized  lot  that  you  wish.  A  comfortable  log  cabin  with  two  rooms 
can  be  built  for  $50.  A  farm  house  1  and  stories  high,  20  by  30  feet,  from  $250  to 
$300.  A  log  barn,  18  by  40,  $40.  Of  course  there  are  several  other  items  of  expense 
that  I  cannot  give  exactly  here,  such  as  a  well,  cellar,  garden  fence,  yards,  shed,  etc., 
that  cost  labor  and  not  money.” 

BUILDINGS  ON  PRAIRIE  FARMS. 

Buildings  were  cheaply  constructed.  A  frequent  method  of  building  is  thus 
described : 19 

“  I  have  good,  warm  stabling  for  some  forty  head  of  cattle  and  sheep,  that  did  not 
cost  ten  dollars.  The  sides  are  built  with  rails  laid  up  in  pens  about  two  or  three  feet 
wide,  supported  of  course,  by  cross  pieces,  and  the  space  filled  with  old  hay,  straw, 
turfs,  or  small  bushes  with  the  leaves  on,  until  the  requisite  height  is  attained,  and  then 
covered  with  poles,  rails,  and  coarse  hay.  Any  quantity  of  hay  for  covering  can  be  had 
in  the  prairie  country,  for  a  small  amount  of  labor.  A  small  ditch  or  bank  on  the 
upper  side,  keeps  the  water  from  the  bank  inside,  which,  well  covered  with  straw, 

makes  an  excellent  floor .  And  yet,  how  many  expose  their  whole  stock,  winter 

after  winter,  by  the  side  of  a  stack  on  the  open  prairies  where  the  Northwest  wind 
sometimes  blows  almost  hard  enough  to  take  their  hides  from  their  backs,  were  it  not 
for  the  natural  adhesiveness  between  ‘  skin  and  bone.’  ” 

FENCES. 

The  question  of  fences  was  important  to  the  prairie  farmer.  The  first  set¬ 
tlers  of  the  country  who  took  up  land  in  or  near  the  forests  had  no  difficulty 
in  securing  material  for  wooden  fences ;  but  to  the  prairie  farmer  who  had 
no  woods,  fencing  to  protect  fields  from  the  ranging  cattle  and  hogs  was  one 
of  the  chief  items  of  necessary  expense.  How  to  cheaply  construct  a  sheep- 


17  Caird,  Prairie  Farming  in  America ,  67. 

18  Cultivator,  X  (1843),  p.  37- 

19  Ibid.,  VII  ( 1840) ,  p.  52. 


Ill 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


and  hog-proof  fence  was  a  leading  topic  of  discussion  in  the  prairie  region. 
In  the  wooded  regions  the  Virginia  rail  or  post  and  board  fence  was  common, 
but  the  early  settlers  in  the  prairie  region,  especially  in  central  Illinois  and 
eastern  Iowa,  where  fence  rails  or  stone  could  not  be  readily  obtained,  fre¬ 
quently  resorted  to  sod  fences.  Wire  fencing  was  coming  into  use  by  1850, 
especially  in  Iowa,  but  it  was  much  criticized  on  account  of  sagging,  short  life 
and  the  danger  of  injuring  stock.  The  early  wire  fences  were  not  hog-tight. 
The  osage  orange  as  a  hedge  was  actively  recommended  and  was  planted  by 
many.  Nurseries  for  the  propagation  of  the  plants  were  established  in  Illi¬ 
nois  and  Iowa  by  speculative  farmers  who  hoped  for  large  returns. 

SOIL  EXPLOITATION. 

Soil  exploitation  was  the  keynote  of  western  agriculture.  Political,  religious, 
and  other  reasons  brought  in  immigrants  from  abroad,  but  it  was  mainly  the 
cheapness,  accessibility  and  fertility  of  western  lands  that  attracted  the  eastern 
farmer.  The  usual  practice  of  soil  exhaustion  is  well  illustrated  by  an 
account  of  Missouri  farming  in  1849: 20 

“Farming  here  is  conducted  on  the  regular  skinning  system .  There  seems 

to  be  a  continual  struggle  with  each  farmer  to  have  longer  strings  of  fence,  bigger  fields, 
and  more  ground  in  corn  than  his  neighbor.  The  result  of  which  struggle,  in  conjunc¬ 
tion  with  the  ease  with  which  land  is  brought  into  cultivation  in  the  prairie,  convenient 
to  timber,  is  that  most  of  the  farmers  in  this  country  scratch  over  a  great  deal  of  ground, 
but  cultivate  none.  Instead,  however,  of  endeavoring  to  extricate  themselves  from  their 
difficulties  in  the  most  reasonable  way  possible,  that  of  ceasing  to  enlarge  their  farms 
and  growing  grass  seed  until  they  are  reduced  to  a  manageable  size,  the  cry  is  still 
more  land,  more  corn.  It  is  corn,  corn,  corn,  nothing  but  corn.  ....  Take  the  state 
over  and  I  have  no  idea  that  one  farmer  out  of  fifty  has  ever  hauled  a  load  of  manure 
to  his  corn  fields  since  he  has  been  in  the  state.  I  have  doubts,  even,  whether  one  in  a 

hundred  has  ever  done  it .  Some,  however,  have  the  foresight  and  sagacity  to 

avoid  all  this  by  building  their  stables,  barns,  etc.,  over  or  contiguous  to  a  ravine,  by 
which  they  are  drained,  so  that  each  shower  abates  the  nuisance,  and  the  lucky  farmer 
is  not  troubled  with  muddy  lots  and  rotting  barns.” 

Such  practices  were  not  entirely  the  result  of  ignorance.  European  travelers 
in  America  loudly  lamented  and  condemned  the  “  broad  acres  ”  culture  of 
the  West.  Then,  as  now,  soil  improvement  was  the  theme  of  the  majority 
of  treatises  on  good  agriculture,  but  it  was  practiced  but  little  in  the  West, 
except  by  the  feeding  of  cattle  and  hogs  on  the  land.  A  traveler  through  Illi¬ 
nois  in  1840  writes: 

“Indeed  the  two  greatest  objections  to  the  West,  in  my  judgment,  are  that  the  land 
is  too  cheap  and  too  productive.”  21 

THE  ECONOMIC  BASIS  OF  WESTERN  PREDATORY 

AGRICULTURE. 

The  prevailing  opinion  in  Illinois  regarding  soil  improvement  was  expressed 
in  the  Prairie  Farmer  in  1854: 22 

“  Any  one  who  sees  the  agricultural  papers  of  the  Eastern  States  will  be  struck  with 
one  fact  concerning  them  all;  and  that  is,  that  their  chief  strength  is  expended  on 


20  Cultivator,  new  series,  VI  (1849),  p.  302. 

21  Western  Farmer,  I  (1840),  p.  147. 

22  Prairie  Farmer  (1854),  P-  81. 


INFLUENCE  OF  PRAIRIES  ON  PROGRESS  OF  AGRICULTURE  273 


matters  which  relate  to  preparing  the  soil.  The  same  fact  is  evident  in  all  the  English 
Agricultural  literature;  every  work  relative  to  the  subject,  even  to  a  book  on  flowers, 
is  nearly  filled  with  directions  for  composing  the  soil,  with  which  the  beginning  is  to  be 
made.  Manures,  how  made,  how  saved,  how  kept,  how  applied — phosphate,  superphos¬ 
phate,  ‘  Improved '  superphosphate,  guano,  composts,  and  the  like,  and  related  things, 

fill  from  one-half  to  nine-tenths  of  their  pages .  What  would  they  think  if  they 

had  their  soil  to  start  with,  instead  of  being  obliged  to  make  it.  They  would  then  be 
precisely  where  we  are,  with  our  soil  made  to  our  hands,  ready  to  be  stirred  and  receive 
the  seed.  Ihroughout  all  the  Northwest,  with  but  few  exceptions,  we  have  the  soil  to 
begin  with,  which  these  Atlantic  Shore  and  English  farmers  would  like  to  make  by  the 
aid  of  their  manures.” 

“  All  hail  the  inventor,”  writes  another  western  enthusiast,  “  they  do  more 
benefit  to  their  fellow  men  than  a  thousand  theorizers  on  guano.”  The  facts 
were  that  the  kind  of  farming  that  paid  best  in  the  West  was  exploitation  of  the 
soil.  It  looked  like  poor  farming  to  an  easterner  and  to  a  European,  but  it  was 
the  system  most  profitable  to  the  settlers  on  the  prairies.  Land  was  cheap, 
fields  were  large,  and  the  best  management  was  the  application  of  a  minimum 
of  labor  per  acre.  This  did  not  imply  a  minimum  of  work  per  man ;  often  a 
maximum  of  human  exertion  was  expended. 

There  were,  indeed,  outside  the  prairies,  farming  regions  which  had  exceed- 
ingly  productive  soil,  such  as  the  wheat  region  of  western  New  York,  the 
limestone  valleys  of  southeastern  Pennsylvania,  the  bluegrass  region  of  Ken¬ 
tucky,  and  the  bottom  lands  of  Ohio.  But  the  contrast  between  the  scant  and 
rocky  soils  of  New  England  and  the  level,  fertile  lands  of  the  prairies  was 
little  less  than  the  contrast  between  the  opening  of  a  farm  in  the  forest  and 
one  on  the  prairie.  The  cheapness  of  fertile  land  in  the  West  and  the  ease 
with  which  it  could  be  worked  made  it  a  great  attraction  to  the  eastern  farmer. 
The  rapid  expansion  of  western  agriculture  by  increasing  the  annual  produc¬ 
tion  of  beef,  pork,  cheese,  and  wheat  made  possible  the  development  of  an 
urban  population  in  the  East.  Meanwhile,  the  competition  of  western  products 
caused  a  readjustment  in  eastern  farming. 


Chapter  XXII. — Agricultural  Labor  and 

Population. 

Closely  connected  with  the  abundant  supply  of  land,  were  the  problems 
arising  out  of  the  relative  scarcity  of  farm  labor.  Abundance  of  land  and 
scarcity  of  labor  were  influential  in  determining  the  methods  of  culture  as 
well  as  the  kind  of  crops  to  be  grown.  Scarcity  of  labor  was  in  no  wise 
peculiar  to  this  period  of  our  agricultural  history,  but  during  the  rapid  expan¬ 
sion  of  production  in  the  prairies  it  became  increasingly  evident,  in  both  East 

and  West. 

One  cause  of  the  growing  scarcity  of  farm  laborers  was  the  development  of 
manufacturing  and  the  resulting  new  demand  for  labor.  Throughout  the  East 
the  high  relative  wages  paid  to  mechanics  was  a  matter  of  much  concern  to 
farmers  who  employed  labor.  In  Rhode  Island,  in  1849*  while  farm  laborers 
were  receiving  from  $12  to  $15  a  month  for  ordinary  farm  work,  and  $1  a 
day  for  mowing,  mechanics  were  receiving  from  $1  to  $2  a  day  throughout 
the  year.1  In  Wisconsin,  farm  labor  was  quoted  at  $12  a  month  and  that  of 
mechanics  was  $20.  It  seemed  to  be  generally  conceded  that  farmers  could 
not  pay  wages  equivalent  to  those  paid  by  manufacturers. 

Emigration  to  the  West,  now  increasing  in  volume,  caused  a  constant  drain 
of  labor  from  the  Eastern  States.  A  New  England  farmer  wrote  in  1841 : 2 

“  A  great  proportion  of  our  young  men,  on  arriving  at  the  age  of  manhood,  push  their 
fortunes  in  the  West,  and  take  their  farms  on  the  rich  bottom  lands  of  the  Mississippi, 
and  its  tributaries,  leaving  the  agricultural  portions  of  New  England,  with  help  scarcely 
sufficient  to  cultivate  their  lands  in  the  ordinary  way.” 

WAGES  IN  THE  EAST  AND  IN  THE  WEST. 

In  the  West,  the  lack  of  market,  the  low  price  of  produce,  and  constant 
arrival  of  new  settlers  were  conditions  which  tended  to  keep  down  the  level 
of  wages. 

In  Berkshire  County,  Massachusetts,  in  1847,  farm  laborers  were  said  to 
command 

“  ten,  eleven  and  twelve  dollars  per  month,  through  the  year.  In  the  summer  months, 
men,’  from  twelve  to  fifteen  dollars.  Day  laborers,  at  haying  and  harvest,  from  one 
dollar  to  one  dollar  and  twenty-five  cents,  at  other  farm  work,  from  sixty-two  and  a  half 
to  seventy-five  cents.  In  winter,  by  the  month,  from  eight  to  ten  dollars.  By  the  day, 
fifty  to  sixty-two  and  a  half  cents.”  3 

The  scarcity  of  labor  was  most  severely  felt  during  harvest  time  in  both  East 
and  West,  especially  in  the  seasons  of  haying  and  of  reaping1  the  small  grains. 
After  the  improvement  of  the  plow  a  considerable  area  could  be  planted  in 
the  spring,  but  in  1840  reaping  and  mowing  were  still  done  by  hand  and  the 

1  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Reports,  1849,  Agriculture,  p.  99- 

2  N.  Y.  State  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions,  I  (1841),  p.  359. 

3  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report,  1847,  p.  361. 


274 


AGRICULTURAL  LABOR  AND  POPULATION 


275 


area  which  one  man  could  crop  was  limited  largely  by  his  ability  to  harvest. 
Expert  harvest  hands,  especially  cradlers,  demanded  high  wages.  In  New 
York  State,  in  1852,  the  average  mower,  it  was  estimated,  received  from 
75  cents  to  $1  a  day,  for  cutting  about  ij  acres.4  An  average  cradler  would 
cut  about  2  acres  of  wheat  a  day.5  In  the  older  and  more  thickly  settled  region 
of  the  Eastern  States  the  demand  for  labor  was  more  uniform  throughout  the 
year  than  in  the  West.  Dairying  and  livestock  farming  were  more  commonly 
followed,  with  a  diversified  field  system.  During  the  winter  months,  lumber¬ 
ing,  teaming,  and  other  pursuits  took  up  the  farmers’  time.  But  even  in  the 
East  it  was  a  difficult  task  to  secure  sufficient  help  for  harvest. 

A  large  portion  of  the  farm  labor  was  furnished  by  the  family.  The  making 
of  butter  and  cheese  involved  much  labor,  which  usually  fell  to  the  women. 


Table  32. — Wages  of  agricultural  labor.* 


State. 

Year. 

W  ages. 

Value  of  board 
per  week. 

By  the  year. 

By  the  month. 

By  the  day. 

Wisconsin  . 

1847 
1849 
1849 

1848 

1849 

1849 

1849 

1847 

1849 

1847 

$12 

10  to  13 

9i  to  13 

10  ton 

10  to  14 

10  to  15 

12  to  15 

8  to  15 

10  to  16 

15 

5  to  7 

8  to  12 

$1.00  to  1.50 

Indiana  . 

Michigan  . 

Ohio  . 

$50  to  120 

.70  to  .90 

$1.00  to  1.50 

Do . 

.1  2C 

New  York  . 

Rhode  Island  . 

£  . 150 

•75  to  1.25 
.75  to  1.50 
. 1. 00 

. 1-25 

Massachusetts  . 

Vermont  . 

120  to  I44 

.622  to  1.25 

.75 

I.50  to  2.00 

Delaware  . 

r . 

1 . 

1.00  to  1.50 

1.62^  to  1.87^ 

“  Compiled  from  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Reports,  1845,  p.  1149;  1848,  p.  686,  and  from  reports 
of  State  boards  of  agriculture  and  State  agricultural  societies. 


Not  infrequently  women  milked  the  cows,  and  in  the  West  they  usually  as¬ 
sisted  in  the  field  during  the  rush  of  harvest  season.  During  the  summer 
season  the  extra  demand  for  labor  was  partially  supplied  by  utilizing  more 
fully  the  labor  of  the  boys  on  the  farm.  One  of  the  great  benefits  anticipated 
from  the  introduction  of  agricultural  machinery  was  the  more  complete 
utilization  of  boy  labor,  for  it  was  thought  that  the  work  which  formerly 
required  strong  men  could  then  be  done  by  means  of  machinery  and  boys. 

SCARCITY  OF  LABOR  ON  PRAIRIE  FARMS. 

With  the  spread  of  farming  into  the  prairies  the  severity  of  the  problem  of 
harvesting  was  greatly  aggravated.  So  long  as  land  had  to  be  cleared  of 
trees  and  underbrush  before  it  could  be  cultivated,  the  acreage  of  arable  land 
was  limited  by  the  supply  of  men  to  make  the  clearing,  but  when  the  progress 
of  settlement  reached  the  prairies  the  supply  of  arable  land  became  at  once 
abundant,  and  in  proportion  the  men  to  sow  and  harvest  were  scarce.  In 

4  N.  Y.  State  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions,  XII  (1852),  p.  108. 

5  Ibid.,  1 1 5. 


276 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


the  wheat-growing  regions  of  the  West  the  scarcity  of  labor  for  harvest  was 
strongly  felt.  Great  as  were  the  advantages  of  the  cradle  over  the  sickle,  the 
cradle  was  still  entirely  inadequate.  A  writer  of  southern  Michigan  described 
the  condition  in  that  region  in  1839 :  6 7 

“  Some  idea  may  be  formed  of  the  extent  of  the  crop,  when  I  state  that  on  Pigeon 
Prairie,  on  one  area  of  twelve  thousand  acres,  eight  thousand  at  least  is  in  wheat. 
On  Prairie  Round,  with  an  area  of  twenty  thousand  acres,  at  least  thirteen  thousand  is 
in  wheat.  On  the  elevation  of  the  Prairie  Round,  you  can  behold  the  vast  plain  of  twelve 

thousand  acres,  all  waving  in  golden  color,  ripe  for  the  cradle .  At  this  moment 

every  man  and  boy,  and  even  women  are  actively  engaged  in  cradling,  raking,  binding 
and  shocking  the  golden  harvest.  I  have  seen  hundreds  of  women  near  their  log  cabins 
assisting  in  the  active  duties  of  the  field.  But,  after  all,  a  large  portion  will  be  left  out, 
and  be  destroyed.  There  is  not  help  enough  in  the  country  to  secure  the  crop.” 

Many  acres  of  grain  were  annually  lost  in  the  large  western  wheat  fields 
because  of  inability  to  harvest  in  time. 

CAUSES  OF  INCREASING  SCARCITY  OF  LABOR,  1850  to  1860. 

During  the  fifties  the  scarcity  of  agricultural  labor  came  more  into  promi¬ 
nence.  In  the  West,  the  Mexican  War  had  withdrawn  a  considerable  number 
from  the  ranks  of  agricultural  laborers ;  in  the  East,  manufacturing  cities  were 
attracting  an  increased  number  of  laborers  from  the  rural  regions.  The  gold 
discoveries  in  California  of  1849  attracted  many  others.  Especially  large  was 
the  demand  made  by  the  railroads  for  men  in  the  construction  of  the  new 
lines,  which  were  being  rapidly  extended  through  the  western  region.  It  was 
estimated  in  1857  that  the  railroads,  for  construction  and  operation,  had  with¬ 
drawn  400,000  able-bodied  men  from  other  employment.7, 

A  Michigan  farmer  thus  describes  the  condition  in  his  community  as  typical 
of  much  of  the  surrounding  wheat-growing  territory : 8 

“Our  school  district  embraces  about  three  thousand  acres  of  land;  the  majority  of 
farms  are  eighty-acre  lots;  four  lots,  only,  are  unsettled;  there  are  twenty-seven 
families  in  the  district;  three  men  are  mechanics,  who  follow  their  professions,  and 
owning,  together,  ten  acres  of  land;  there  are  not  more  than  six  or  eight  boys  in  the 
district  who  are  old  enough  to  manage  a  team;  five  men  have  left  the  district  for  the 
gold  diggings  this  season;  four  of  them  left  farms  to  be  managed  as  they  best  could  be; 
the  improvements  on  the  farms  will  range  from  twenty-five  to  one  hundred  acres  of 
arable  land.  There  is  but  one  man  in  the  whole  district  who  works  at  day’s  work,  and 
he  is  accidentally  here  for  a  short  time.” 

The  high  price  of  wheat  which  prevailed  from  1854  to  1857,  and  the  rapid 
extension  of  railroads  and  markets  into  the  prairies,  led  to  a  great  increase  in 
the  area  of  land  under  cultivation.  It  was  comparatively  easy  to  secure  a 
farm,  when  the  price  of  a  day’s  labor  would  buy  an  acre  of  land.  Many 
eastern  farm  laborers,  who  could  command  the  means,  migrated  to  the 
“  West  ”  to  cultivate  farms  of  their  own. 


6  Western  Farmer ,  I  (1840),  p.  60. 

7  Hunt’s  Merchant’s  Magazine,  XXXVII,  365. 

8  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Reports,  1852,  Agriculture,  278 


AGRICULTURAL  LABOR  AND  TOPULATION 


111 


WAGES  IN  1857. 

The  wages  of  farm  labor  in  Ohio  showed  a  significant  advance  between 
1848  and  1857.  In  1857  wages  were  commonly  estimated  at  from  $150  to 
$200  a  year.  The  wages  of  a  mower  ranged  from  $1  to  $1.50  a  day,  of  a 
cradler  from  $1.50  to  $2.  Rakers  and  binders  usually  received  a  little  more 
than  mowers,  but  a  little  less  than  cradlers.  Owing  to  the  increasing  wages 
of  labor  and  the  constant  improvement  of  agricultural  machinery,  the  relative 
merits  of  man  and  horse  power  were  popular  subjects  of  discussion  during  the 
two  decades.  The  development  of  commercial  agriculture  and  the  use  of 
agricultural  machinery,  particularly  the  reaper,  the  mower,  and  the  corn  culti¬ 
vator,  were  causing  greater  economy  in  the  use  of  labor  on  the  farm. 

THE  WESTWARD  MOVEMENT  OF  POPULATION. 

The  distribution  of  free  population  in  1840,  1850  and  i860  is  shown  in 
figures  33,  34,  and  35.  In  addition,  there  were  in  i860,  225,000  slaves  in 


Fig.  33. — Free  population,  1840.  Each  dot  represents  5000. 


Kentucky;  115,000  in  Missouri;  87,000  in  Maryland,  and  1,800  in  Delaware. 
The  rapid  expansion  westward  into  the  prairie  region  of  the  Northwest  is 
apparent.  The  business  reverses  during  the  depression  which  followed  the 
panic  of  1837  induced  many  to  leave  the  East  to  make  their  homes  in  the 
West.9  The  Mexican  War  and  the  discovery  of  gold  in  California  attracted 
the  attention  of  many  to  the  West.  During  the  rapid  extension  of  railroads 
and  the  high  prices  that  characterized  the  middle  fifties,  it  seemed  as  though 
everyone  was  going,  or  at  least  looking,  toward  the  West.  “  Yankees  ”  were 


9  N.  Y.  State  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions,  II  (1842),  p.  48. 


278 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


AGRICULTURAL  LABOR  AND  POPULATION 


279 


Table  33. — Growth  of  population  in  the  north,  1840  to  i860. 


1840. 

1850. 

i860. 

Division  and  State. 

Popula¬ 

tion. 

Density 
per  square 
mile. 

Popula¬ 

tion. 

Density 
per  square 
mile. 

Popula¬ 

tion. 

Density 
per  square 
mile. 

Thousands. 

No. 

Thousands. 

No. 

Thousands. 

No. 

United  States  . 

17,069 

97 

23,192 

7-9 

3L443 

10.6 

Geographic  Division : 

New  England . 

2,235 

36.1 

2,728 

44.0 

3435 

50.6 

Middle  Atlantic  . . 

4526 

45-2 

5,899 

59-0 

7,459 

74-6 

East  North  Central 

2,925 

10.7 

4,523 

18.4 

6,927 

28.2 

West  North  Central 

427 

1.6 

880 

3-1 

*2,165 

5-3 

Mountain  . 

•  •  •  • 

•  •  •  • 

73 

.2 

175 

•3 

Pacific  . 

•  •  •  • 

•  •  •  • 

106 

.2 

444 

1.0 

New  England : 

Maine  . 

502 

16.8 

583 

19-5 

628 

21.0 

New  Hampshire  . . 

284 

3i.5 

318 

35-2 

326 

36.1 

Vermont  . 

292 

32.0 

314 

344 

315 

34-5 

Massachusetts  .... 

738 

91.7 

994 

123.7 

1,231 

I53-I 

Rhode  Island  .... 

109 

102.0 

148 

138.3 

175 

163.7 

Connecticut  . 

310 

64-3 

37i 

76.9 

460 

95-5 

Middle  Atlantic: 

New  York  . 

2,429 

51-0 

3,097 

65.0 

3,88i 

81.4 

New  Jersey  . 

373 

49-7 

490 

65.2 

672 

89.4 

Pennsylvania  . 

1,724 

38.5 

2312 

51.6 

2,906 

64.8 

East  North  Central : 

Ohio  . 

1,520 

37-3 

1,980 

48.6 

2,340 

574 

Indiana  . 

686 

19. 1 

988 

27-5 

i,350 

37-6 

Illinois  . 

476 

8.5 

852 

15-2 

1,712 

30.6 

Michigan  . 

212 

3-7 

398 

6.9 

749 

130 

Wisconsin  . 

3i 

0.4 

305 

5-5 

776 

14.0 

West  North  Central : 

Minnesota  . 

•  •  •  • 

•  •  •  • 

6 

•  •  •  • 

172 

2.1 

Iowa  . 

43 

0.2 

192 

35 

675 

12. 1 

Missouri  . 

384 

5-6 

682 

9.9 

1,182 

17.2 

North  Dakota  .... 

•  •  •  • 

b 

•  •  •  • 

South  Dakota  .... 

•  •  •  • 

•  •  •  • 

b 

•  •  •  • 

Nebraska  . 

•  •  •  • 

•  •  •  • 

•  •  •  • 

29 

0.2 

Kansas  . 

•  •  •  • 

•  •  •  • 

•  •  •  • 

107 

1-3 

Mountain : 

Montana  . 

•  •  •  • 

•  •  •  • 

•  •  •  • 

•  •  •  • 

•  •  •  • 

Idaho  . 

.... 

•  •  •  • 

•  •  •  • 

•  •  «  • 

•  •  •  • 

Wyoming  . 

•  •  •  • 

•  •  •  • 

•  •  •  • 

•  •  •  • 

•  •  •  • 

Colorado  . 

•  •  •  • 

•  •  •  • 

•  •  •  • 

34 

0.3 

New  Mexico  . 

•  •  •  • 

62 

0.3 

94 

0.4 

Arizona  . 

•  •  •  • 

•  •  •  • 

•  •  •  • 

•  •  •  • 

•  •  •  • 

Utah  . 

•  •  •  • 

11 

•  •  •  • 

40 

0.3 

Nevada  . 

•  •  •  • 

•  •  •  • 

•  •  •  • 

1 7 

0.1 

Pacific : 

Washington  . 

•  •  •  • 

•  •  •  • 

•  •  •  • 

12 

0.1 

Oregon  . 

•  •  •  • 

13 

•  •  •  • 

52 

0.5 

California  . 

•  •  •  • 

93 

0.6 

380 

2.4 

a  Does  not  include  Dakota  Territory. 
b  Dakota  Territory,  4,837. 


Table  34. — Immigration  1830-1860. 


1830-40 

1840-50 

1850-60 


599,125 

1,713,250 

2.598,214 


280  AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 

said  to  be  leaving  New  England  in  “  shoals,”  seeking  land  in  the  West— a 
piece  of  prairie  and  woodland  in  Illinois,  Wisconsin,  or  Iowa.  It  was  during 
this  period  that  foreign  immigration  became  an  important  element  in  the 
settlement  of  the  West.  Economic,  political,  and  religious  disturbances  in 
western  Europe  were  sending  an  increased  flood  of  immigrants  to  this  country, 
many  of  whom  went  directly  to  the  West.  After  1844,  immigration  from 
Germany  and  Norway  rapidly  increased,  and  from  Ireland  after  the  potato 
famine  in  1846.  While  many  forces  were  operating  to  encourage  a  movement 
of  population,  the  direction  of  the  movement  and  the  destination  of  the  immi¬ 
grants  was  determined  by  the  presence  in  the  northern  Mississippi  Valley 
of  vast  areas  of  cheap  but  fertile  prairie  lands  made  easily  accessible  by  new 
means  of  transportation. 

In  1840,  the  States  and  Territories  of  Ohio,  Indiana,  Illinois,  Michigan, 
Missouri,  Wisconsin,  and  Iowa  had  a  population  of  3,350,000,  of  which  more 
than  2,000,000  were  in  Ohio  and  Indiana  alone.  I11  1850,  the  same  States, 
with  Minnesota  included,  had  5,400,000  people,  an  increase  of  over  60  per 
cent  in  10  years.  In  i860,  with  Kansas,  Nebraska,  and  Dakota  added,  the 
number  was  over  9,000,000,  an  increase  of  68  per  cent  since  1850.  In  i860, 
the  far  West  had  600,000  people,  two-thirds  of  whom  lived  in  California. 
(See  Table  33.) 


Chapter  XXIII. — Agricultural 


Machinery. 


The  scarcity  of  labor  and  the  expansion  of  agricultural  production  into  the 
prairie  region  stimulated  the  rapid  development  and  introduction  of  improved 
agricultural  machinery.  The  improvement  along  these  lines  which  had  been 
made  before  1840  was  summarized  by  Judge  Buel,1  who  wrote: 


The  disparity  between  old  and  new  implements  of  culture  is  great,  not  only  in  the 
time  employed,  but  in  the  manner  in  which  they  do  their  work,  and  in  the  power  required 

1°  PCri°/tm  lt  7hc  ?  d  pI°Ugh  re(luired  a  four-cattle  team,  and  two  hands,  to  manage 
it,  and  the  work  ordinarily  was  but  half  executed.  The  improved  plough  is  generally 
prope  e  y  tw  o  cattle,  requires  but  one  man  to  manage  it,  and,  when  properly  governed, 
performs  thorough  work.  Harrows  and  other  implements  have  undergone  a  like  move¬ 
ment.  Besides,  new  implements,  which  greatly  economize  the  labor  of  tillage,  are  coming 
m-tfHHSeuMthe  r°  er’  c}lltlvator’  drill-barrow,  etc.,  so  that  a  farm  may  now  be  worked 

be  better  wo'rkT wrthal »  *  W3S  W°nt  *°  be  W°rked  f°rty  yearS  ag0’  and  may 


Whatever  the  degree  of  development  in  agricultural  machinery  prior  to  1840, 
however,  it  was  only  a  beginning  when  compared  with  the  improvement  and 

the  general  adoption  of  new  machinery  which  took  place  during  the  next  two 
decades. 

In  1840,  grain  was  generally  reaped  with  the  cradle,  which  had  come  into 
use  about  1820,  but  the  sickle  had  not  been  entirely  abandoned.  Hussey  and 
McCormick  had  patented  their  reaping  machines  (see  figs.  41,  42,  43),  but 
as  yet  their  actual  use  was  negligible.  Stationary  and  movable  ’threshing 
machines,  consisting  of  a  simple  cylinder  and  concave  and  driven  by  horse 
power,  had  been  widely  adopted,  although  a  considerable  amount  of  grain 
(especially  in  the  West)  was  still  trodden  out  by  horses  and  cattle  or  beaten 
out  with  the  flail.  The  winnowing  was  done  in  a  fan-mill  turned  by  hand,  but 
many  in  the  West  possessed  not  even  a  fanning-mill.  The  grain  drill  was 
scarcely  known.2  Hay  was  cut  with  the  scythe;  the  mowing  machine, 
however,  had  been  invented  and  tried.  The  wooden  horse-rake,  said  to  be 
able  to  do  the  work  of  6  men,  had  been  widely  introduced.  The  cast-iron 
plow  (fig.  36)  had  superseded  the  old  wooden-moldboard  plow.  The  Roman 
harrow  and  the  roller  were  commonly  used.  Corn  was  planted  by  hand  and 
cultivated  with  the  plow  or,  in  the  East,  with  a  crude  and  more  or  less  unsatis¬ 
factory  cultivator.  Clover-hullers,  fodder-cutters,  hand-seeders,  and  small 
tools  were  being  rapidly  improved.  As  early  as  1820,  factory-made  scythes 
were  selling  at  from  $12  to  $18  a  dozen.  In  1831,  steel  hoes  were  made  in 
Pittsburg  for  about  $4-5°  a  dozen,  or  one-half  the  price  of  iron  hoes  10  years 
before.  Shovels  were  made  and  sold  at  one-third  their  former  price.3  Farm 
machinery  was  still  largely  the  product  of  the  farm  or  local  blacksmith  shop. 


281 


The  Farmers’  Companion  (ed.  of  1839),  p.  123. 
-  Cultivator,  new  series,  VIII  (1851),  p.  72. 

6  U.  S.  Census  of  i860,  Agriculture,  p.  xxiv. 


282  AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


The  improvement  and  introduction  of  agricultural  machinery  during  this 
period  was  not  confined  to  America.  In  England  many  important  new  ma¬ 
chines  had  been  invented  and  were  in  use.  American  agricultural  books  and 
periodicals  of  the  time  abounded  with  pictures  and  accounts  of  Englis 
machinery  and  frequently  advocated  its  use  in  America.  But  in  England  labor 
was  plentiful  and  land  scarce ;  in  America  land  was  plentiful,  and  the  oppor¬ 
tunities  for  labor  were  many.  As  in  most  new  countries,  the  cost  of  manual 
labor  was  high  in  comparison  with  the  price  of  land  and  its  products ;  hence 
in  America  the  necessity  for  using  labor-saving  contrivances  was  greater  than 
in  older  countries.  The  large  area  of  productive  land,  together  with  high- 
priced  labor,  gave  incentive  and  direction  to  the  development  of  American 
machinery.  Cheapness,  simplicity  and  efficiency  in  covering  a  large  area  were 
the  qualities  sought  for.  Since  farmers  had  taken  little  pains  to  remove  stones 
and  stumps  or  to  level  inequalities  in  their  meadows  and  gram  fields  for  the 
better  working  of  machinery,  it  became  incumbent  on  the  inventors  to  produce 
implements  that  would  work  almost  anywheie. 


Fig.  36— Prouty  and  Mear’s  plow. 

The  factory  plow,  as  distinguished  from  the  plow  made  in  the  blacksmith  shop,  was 
coming  into  use  in  1840. 

THE  IMPROVEMENT  OF  THE  PLOW. 

A  notable  event  in  the  introduction  of  improved  agricultural  machinery  was 
the  substitution  of  the  cast-iron  plow  for  the  old  wooden-moldboard  plow 
which  had  been  commonly  used  up  to  about  1825.  (See  fig.  3,  p.  124.)  I  e 
excessive  friction  of  these  old-fashioned  plows  had  been  a  leading  objection 
to  their  use.  They  were  constructed  awkwardly  enough  in  the  first  place,  but 
the  form  of  the  moldboard  was  especially  defective.  An  acre  was  considere 
a  good  day’s  work.  The  transition  from  the  wooden-moldboard  to  the  cast- 
iron  plow  was  practically  completed  by  1840.  It  was  said  in  1845  that  wit 
a  cast-iron  plow, 

“  on  the  same  farms,  the  same  fields,  with  a  tougher  sward,  are  now  plowed  with  one 

yoke  of  oxen,  and  often  with  only  one  man .  An  acre  and  a  half  is  plowed  in  a 

day  in  a  manner  greatly  superior  to  the  former  mode. 

There  was  a  great  variety  in  the  pattern  of  plows  in  use  in  the  East  in 
1840.  Each  pattern  had  its  advocates,  and  each  one  in  its  turn  was  promoted 


4  Cultivator,  new  series,  II  (1845),  p.  44- 


AGRICULTURAL  MACHINERY 


283 


by  its  admirers  as  the  best.  At  the  New  York  State  Fair  in  1842  “  more 
than  forty  plows  of  different  designs  were  offered  for  the  inspection  of  the 
committee.’’ 5  The  “  Livingston  County  ”  plow,  the  “  Montgomery  County  ” 
plow,  the  “  Wyoming,”  and  the  “  Geneva  ”  were  popular  in  New  York  State 
in  1840.  The  plow  was  being  adapted  to  various  conditions  and  uses;  special 
plows  were  being  produced  for  sod-land,  for  stubble-land,  for  clay  lands,  and 
for  sandy  lands.  Aside  from  variations  in  the  curvature  of  the  moldboard  the 
merits  of  various  types  of  coulters  and  of  the  addition  of  a  wheel  to  the  for¬ 
ward  end  of  the  plowbeam  were  popular  subjects  for  discussion  in  1840.  Ex¬ 
periments  were  made  in  western  New  York  with  gang-plows  with  which  to 
stir  the  wheat-fallow,  or  to  cover  wheat  or  pea-seed  to  a  greater  depth  than 
possible  with  the  cultivator.6  In  Maryland,  Kentucky,  and  other  southern 
btates.  the  bar-share  plow  was  in  common  use.  With  increased  attention  to 
intensive  culture,  subsoil  plows  were  coming  into  use  in  the  eastern  states 

Plow-making  had  begun  to  leave  the  hands  of  the  local  blacksmith  and  was 
becoming  a  factory  industry. 

THE  INTRODUCTION  OF  STEEL  PLOWS. 

The  cast-iron  plow,  which  met  with  such  good  success  in  the  Eastern 
States,  failed  to  give  satisfaction  on  the  prairies  and  bottom  lands  of  the  West. 
They  ran  heavy  ”  because  they  could  not  be  made  to  scour  properly  in  the 
prairie  soils.  For  breaking  the  prairie  sod,  the  most  satisfactory  plow  in  1840 
was  an  immense  affair  with  wooden  moldboard  and  iron  share.  (See  fio-.  37  ) 
The  moldboard  was  usually  covered  with  strips  of  iron  to  lessen  the  friction 
as  much  as  possible.  Two  small  wheels,  connected  by  a  short  axle  and  fre¬ 
quently  made  from  a  piece  of  plank,  supported  the  front  end  of  the  beam 
and  governed  the  depth  as  well  as  the  width  of  the  furrow.  From  5  to  6 

yoke  of  good  oxen  were  required  to  operate  a  plow  of  this  kind,  with  only  a 
single  man  or  a  boy  to  drive. 

“  Fancy,  then,  a  plow  share  weighing  125  lbs.,  the  beam  fourteen  feet  long,  attached 
to  a  pair  of  cart  wheels,  to  the  tongue  of  which  are  hitched  from  three  to  seven  yoke 

of  oxen  turning  an  unbroken  sod,  eighteen  to  twenty-six  inches  wide,  and  sometimes  a 
mile  in  length . ”  7 

The  steel  plow  (see  fig.  38)  which  would  scour  in  the  prairie  soil  was  how¬ 
ever,  coming  into  use.  John  Deere  had  made  his  first  steel  plow  from  a  saw 
blade  in  1837  and  within  a  few  years  his  plows  had  become  celebrated  in  all 
the  Rock  River  locality  and  for  a  considerable  distance  up  and  down  the 
Mississippi.8  Steel  plows  were  introduced  into  Kentucky  in  1845.9  By  1850 
they  had  been  found  to  be  a  great  improvement  over  the  old  cast-iron  plow 
on  the  bottom  lands  of  Ohio  and  had  become  widely  used  in  the  prairie 
regions.  At  the  same  time  the  rod  plow  (fig.  39)  and  other  improved  breaking 
plows  were  rapidly  supplanting  the  old  strap  plow  for  breaking  the  prairies. 

During  the  late  fifties  several  attempts  were  made  to  plough  by  steam 
power.  In  1858  the  Illinois  Central  Railroad  Company  endeavored  to  promote 

„5  Y.  State  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions,  II  (1842),  p.  4. 

'Ibxd  III  (1843),  P.  62.  * 

7  Cultivator,  VII  (1840),  p.  33. 

0  f/T1 XI  (l85l)’  p*  I3a 

Ibid.,  VI  (1846),  p.  42. 


284 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


Fig.  37. — Prairie  breaking  plow. 

In  the  early  days  the  virgin  prairie  sod  was  broken  with  large  plows  with  wooden 
moldboards  plated  with  iron  strips  which  turned  furrows  as  wide  as  thirty  inches. #  It 
was  said  to  be  one  of  the  most  picturesque  sights  of  the  West  to  see  one  of  these  im¬ 
mense  plows  drawn  by  oxen  moving  across  the  prairie.  “Two  old  and  well  trained 
yokes,  one  to  lead  and  the  6ther  at  the  plow,  with  four  or  five  pair  of  young  cattle  in  the 
middle  ”  were  said  to  constitute  the  most  efficient  team.  The  self-holding  arrangement 
saved  the  time  and  expense  of  one  man  in  breaking,  the  trucks  regulating  the  depth  as 
well  as  the  width  of  furrow.  The  share  was  frequently  made  separate  to  facilitate 
removal  for  sharpening. 


Fig.  38. — Steel  plow.  Improved  clipper. 

The  cast-iron  plows  so  generally  in  use  in  the  eastern  states  proved  unsatisfactory 
on  the  prairies  as  they  would  not  scour.  The  steel  plows  had  been  made  and  tried  before 
1840  and  by  1845  they  were  coming  rapidly  into  use  in  the  prairie  region,  supplanting  the 
cast-iron  plow.  The  draft  of  the  plow  was  thus  lessened,  the  quality  of  work  much 
improved,  and  the  paddle  which  until  now  had  been  used  to  keep  the  plow  clean  coula 
be  dispensed  with. 


AGRICULTURAL  MACHINERY 


285 


the  cause  by  offering  a  premium  of  $3,000  for  the  first  successful  steam  plow.10 
The  trials  of  Fawkes’  steam  plow  (fig.  40)  from  1858  to  i860  caused  con¬ 
siderable  excitement  for  a  time,* 11  but  the  outcome  proved  unsatisfactory.  The 

construction  of  rotary  diggers  and  grubbers  was  receiving  considerable  atten¬ 
tion  in  i860. 


Fig.  39. — Rod  plow.  Two-horse  rod  breaker. 


The  rod  plow  came  into  use  during  this  period  and  was  widely  used  for  breaking  the 
prairies.  The  steel  rods  in  place  of  a  solid  moldboard  considerably  lessened  the  friction. 


Fig.  40. — Fawkes’  steam  plow. 


The  steam  plow  had  been  invented  and  tried,  but  it  was-  not  a  practical  success. 
Fawkes’  Steam  Plow  was  awarded  the  premium  of  $3,000  given  by  the  Illinois  Central 
Railroad  in  1859. 

Plow-making  was  no  longer  the  work  of  the  local  blacksmith,  but  had 
become  a  factory  industry.  As  early  as  1838  a  factory  in  Pittsburg  was 
manufacturing  a  hundred  plows  a  day  by  the  aid  of  steam  power.  Another 
factory  in  the  same  city  was  making  an  average  of  4,000  plows  a  year.  “  In 

10  U.  S.  Census  of  i860,  Agriculture,  p.  xix. 

11  Country  Gentleman,  XII  (1858),  p.  305;  XIV  (1859),  P-  241. 


286 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


Massachusetts  .  .  .  .  in  1845  there  were  seventy-three  plow  manufactories 
making  61,334  plows  and  other  instruments  annually.”  In  1855  the  number  of 
establishments  had  decreased  to  22,  making  152,686  plows  annually.12  By  1858 
John  Deere  at  Moline,  Illinois,  had  reached  an  annual  output  of  over  13,000 
steel  plows.13 


Fig.  41. — Hussey’s  reaper  (1837). 

Invented  by  Obed  Hussey  of  Cincinnati  in  1833,  this  was  the  most  widely  known  reaper 
in  1840.  The  grain  fell  upon  a  platform  and  was  raked  away  from  it  by  hand.  It  was 
thus  necessary  to  remove  the  grain  before  the  succeeding  round  of  the  machine.  The 
sickle  was  a  notable  feature.  Hussey’s  reaper  remained  substantially  unchanged  during 
this  period. 


Fig.  42. — McCormick’s  reaping  machine  (1834). 


The  early  McCormick  machine  was  drawn  by  one  horse  hitched  in 
shafts  and  walking  beside  the  standing  grain.  The  first  machine  was 
used  in  1840. 

12  U.  S.  Commissioner  of  Agriculture ,  Annual  Report  (1872),  p.  284. 

13  Country  Gentleman ,  X  (1857),  p.  129. 


AGRICULTURAL  MACHINERY 


287 


THE  INVENTION  OF  THE  REAPER. 

Charles  Newbold  and  Jethro  Wood,  improvers  of  the  plow,  were  the  names 
prominently  connected  with  the  development  of  agricultural  machinery  from 
1820  to  1840;  but  from  1840  to  i860  the  names  of  Hussey,  McCormick,  and 
Ketchum,  improvers  of  the  reaper  and  mower,  were  in  the  foreground.  Be¬ 
tween  1820  and  1840  the  farmer  had  learned  to  use  something  better  than 
the  old  wooden  plow,  and  in  the  period  from  1840  to  i860  attention  was  turned 
to  the  development  of  machinery  to  be  used  in  other  lines  of  farm  work,  with 
the  result  that  the  reaper,  the  threshing  machine,  the  mower,  and  other  imple¬ 
ments  were  invented  and  adopted.  It  is  significant  that  whereas  before  1840 
machinery  was  developed  principally  for  the  improvement  of  culture,  after 
that  date  the  fundamental  movement  was  in  the  direction  of  labor-saving 
devices  and  increased  production  through  extension  of  the  area. 

The  development  of  the  reaper  and  the  mower  constituted  the  most  note¬ 
worthy  achievement  in  the  improvement  of  agricultural  machinery  during  the 
period  1840  to  i860.  Obed  Hussey  made  his  first  reaper  in  Cincinnati  and 
patented  it  in  1833  (%•  40  ;  the  following  year  Cyrus  H.  McCormick,  of 
Rockbridge  County,  Virginia,  patented  a  reaper  (fig.  42).  With  the  appear¬ 
ance  of  these  machines  begins  the  history  of  successful  reapers  in  the  United 
States.  The  first  public  trial  of  the  reaper  was  made  by  Hussey  in  a  field  near 
Cincinnati,  Ohio,  before  the  Hamilton  County  Agricultural  Society,  on  July 
2,  1833.  A  year  later  the  Hussey  machine  was  introduced  into  the  States  of 
New  York  and  Illinois,  in  1835  into  Missouri,  and  in  1837  into  Pennsylvania.14 

COMPARISON  OF  HUSSEY’S  AND  McCORMICK’S  INVENTIONS. 

Both  the  Hussey  and  the  McCormick  machines  as  used  in  1840,  simply  cut 
the  grain  and  left  it  to  be  bound  by  hand.  The  Hussey  machine  was  mounted 
on  two  large  drive-wheels,  to  the  right  of  which  extended  a  platform  with 
the  cutting  apparatus  on  the  forward  edge.  The  knife  “  consisted  of  a  series 
of  triangular  plates  riveted  to  a  flat  iron  bar,”  one  end  of  which  was  “  attached 
to  a  pitman  moved  by  a  crank  and  receiving  its  motion  from  the  main  axle 
by  means  of  cogs.”  15  In  operation,  the  grain  was  allowed  to  fall  on  the  plat¬ 
form  until  a  sufficient  amount  had  accumulated  to  make  a  bundle,  when  it 
was  raked  from  the  rear.  The  machine  required  two  horses,  a  boy  to  drive, 
and  a  man  to  push  off  the  grain.  Since  the  grain  was  raked  from  the  platform 
to  the  ground  directly  in  the  rear  of  the  machine,  it  required  from  5  to  7  men, 
according  to  the  state  of  the  crop,  to  remove  the  grain  as  fast  as  cut,  and  thus 
to  prevent  it  being  crushed  by  the  horses  and  wheels  of  the  machine  on  the  suc¬ 
ceeding  round.  The  ordinary  performance  of  the  machine  was  said  to  be  from 
12  to  15  acres  per  day  for  the  light  model  and  15  to  20  for  the  heavy.16 

The  original  McCormick  machine  (fig.  42)  was  “  somewhat  more  compli¬ 
cated  than  Hussey’s,”  and  not  so  substantial.  “  The  drive  wheel  was  situated 

14  U.  S.  Census  of  i860 ,  Agriculture,  p.  xxi. 

15  Miller,  Evolution  of  Reaping  Machines  (U.  S.  Dept,  of  Agric.,  Office  of  Experiment 

Stations,  Bull.  103),  p.  24. 

16  Cultivator,  new  series,  I  (1844),  p.  386. 


288  AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 

almost  directly  behind  the  horse,  and  through  a  series  of  cogs  gave  a  recipro¬ 
cating  motion  to  the  cutting  knife . Behind  this  [knife]  was  an  apron 

or  platform  five  or  six  feet  long,  made  of  thin  plank,  from  which  the  grain 
was  raked  by  a  man  walking  behind  and  to  the  right  of  the  machine.  In 
contrast  to  Hussey’s  reaper,  the  grain  was  raked  from  the  side  of  the  platform, 
thus  avoiding  the  necessity  of  removing  the  grain  before  the  next  round  of 
the  machine.17 

Up  to  1840,  the  reaper  had  hardly  succeeded  in  establishing  itself  with  the 
farmer  as  a  practical  machine.  Grain  was  still  reaped  with  the  cradle.  McCor¬ 
mick  had  not  as  yet  sold  a  single  machine.  Hussey  had  begun  the  manufacture 
of  his  reaper  at  Baltimore  only  two  years  previously.  Several  public  trials 
had  been  held,  but  as  yet  comparatively  few  reapers  were  in  use,  and  those 
mostly  in  the  East.  The  early  machines  were  roughly  built  and  had  a  heavy 
side  draught.  Often  the  horses  had  to  be  driven  at  a  trot  before  the  machine 
would  cut.  Where  the  grain  was  lodged  they  failed  to  cut  and  many  com¬ 
plaints  were  also  made  of  breaking  parts.  But  in  1845  the  Hussey  and 
McCormick  machines  were  coming  into  use  in  the  East.  It  was  said  in  Vir¬ 
ginia  that  probably  not  less  than  $15,000  was  spent  for  reapers  during  the 
summer  of  1846.18  From  New  Castle  County,  Delaware,  during  the  same 
year,  it  was  reported  that  the  seed  sown  by  Sawdon  &  Pennock’s  drill  would 
be  generally  reaped  by  Hussey’s  and  McCormick’s  reaping-machines.19  The 
editor  of  the  Cultivator  writes  20  in  1848,  “  They  [reapers']  will,  undoubtedly, 
be  still  further  simplified  and  improved,  and  we  confidently  anticipate  their 
being  brought  into  extensive  use  on  smooth  lands,  in  the  course  of  a  few  years.” 
The  following  year  it  was  reported  that,  “  labor-saving  implements  are  be¬ 
ginning  to  be  used  pretty  generally.”  Among  those  mentioned  with  high  ap¬ 
proval  was  Hussey’s  reaper.21 

IMPROVEMENTS  IN  THE  REAPER. 

Improvements,  however,  were  constantly  being  made,  and  new  machines 
were  coming  into  the  market.  The  Hussey  machine  was  improved  in  1847. 
The  McCormick  patents  of  1845  and  i847  (see  fig.  43)  covered  many  impor¬ 
tant  improvements  in  that  machine,  including  an  improvement  in  the  cutting 
apparatus  and  the  addition  of  a  raker’s  seat.  It  was  after  the  adoption  of 
these  improvements  that  McCormick’s  reaper  began  to  come  into  successful 
use.22  In  1844  he  sold  50  machines,  in  the  2  years  following  240  were  sold. 
It  is  said  that  McCormick  then  took  a  trip  through  the  West,  where  he  saw 
the  broad  prairies  and  wheat  fields  of  Ohio,  Illinois,  Wisconsin,  and  Missouri. 
It  was  here,  he  decided,  that  the  reaper  was  needed.  In  1847  he  left  the  East 
and  built  his  factory  in  Chicago.  By  1851  he  was  making  1,000  machines 
a  year. 


17  Miller,  Evolution  of  Reaping  Machines  (U.  S.  Dept,  of  Agric.,  Office  of  Experiment 
Stations,  Bull.  103),  p.  24. 

18  American  Farmer,  new  series,  II  (1846),  p.  79. 

19  Ibid.,  84. 

20  Cultivator,  new  series,  V  (1848),  p.  330. 

21  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Reports,  Agriculture,  1849,  p.  107. 

23  Greeno,  Obed  Hussey,  p.  97. 


AGRICULTURAL  MACHINERY 


289 


Fig.  43. — McCormick’s  reaping  machine  (1848). 

^  ^5  the.,pa.te,ntf  °£ 1845  t0  184 7  the  McCormick  reaping  machine  was  much  improved 
and  after  that  date  it  came  rapidly  into  use.  With  the  McCormick  machine  the  grain 
was  raked  from  the  side  of  the  platform,  thus  avoiding  the  necessity  of  binding  before 
the  succeeding  round  of  the  machine.  With  Hussey’s  or  McCormick’s  reaper  two  men 
could  reap  ten  acres  per  day. 


Fig.  44. — Manny’s  reaper  and  mower  (as  a  reaper). 

The  majority  of  the  reapers  of  this  period  were  combined  machines  used  both  as 
reapers  and  as  mowers.  At  the  Geneva  trial  in  1852  the  Manny  machine  in  competition 
with  eleven  other  machines  won  the  first  premium  as  a  mower  and  the  second  premium 
as  a  reaper. 


20 


290  AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 

Before  1846-47  there  were  but  few  reapers  in  the  West,  but  the  rise  in 
price  of  wheat  which  occurred  about  that  date,  gave  new  incentive  to  obtain 
them.  Moreover,  they  had  been  much  improved  and  were  now  manufactured 

in  the  West. 


USE  OF  REAPERS  IN  THE  WEST,  1850. 


The  rapid  introduction  of  reapers  in  the  West  about  1850  is  shown  by  the 
following  typical  reports  from  wheat-growing  counties  in  Ohio,  Michigan 

and  Indiana : 23 


“  The  reaping  machine  has  been  introduced  with  success. 

“  Reapers  are  in  use,  and  much  approved  of.  . 

“  Hussey’s  and  McCormick’s  reapers  have  been  introduced  the  past  season,  an  give 

Sa ‘‘i  Th^ reaping  machine  is  coming  into  use  here,  giving  general  satisfaction  where  used.” 
“McCormick’s  reaper  has  been  used  by  some  of  our  farmers  during  the  last  har- 

“The  drill,  the  horse-reaper,  and  mower  are  not  yet  introduced;  too  many  stumps  in 


the  way  yet.” 

In  Walworth  County,  Wisconsin,  the  cradle,  the  reaping  machine,  and  the 
harvester  or  heading  machine  were  reported  in  common  use  in  1851. 24  The 
Prairie  Farmer  in  1852  estimated  that  “  probably  not  less  than  3,500  new 
reaping  machines  were  put  in  use  in  the  Northwest  the  past  season-  equal 
to  the  labor  of  17,500  men.”  25  The  McCormick  and  Hussey  machines,  as 
used  in  1851,  required  a  crew  of  4  horses  and  2  men,  one  to  drive  and  the 
other  to  rake  the  wheat  from  the  platform.  From  6  to  8  men  were  needed 
to  bind  the  grain  after  the  reaper.  In  good  grain,  when  well  driven,  these 

machines  were  said  to  cut  from  10  to  12  acres  per  day. 

Many  new  types  of  reapers  appeared  on  the  market  after  1850.  Fifteen 
patents  for  reaping  machines  were  issued  from  the  Patent  Office  in  the  years 
1850  and  1851.  Said  the  Prairie  Farmer  in  1850: 

“  The  only  question  now  is  that  of  obtaining  the  best  implement .  Harvesting 

machines,  of  one  sort  or  another,  are  springing  up  in  almost  every  country,  .... 

A  list  was  added  of  16  reapers  which  were  made  and  used  in  Illinois.26  A 
correspondent  from  Illinois  in  1850  writes  : 27 

“I  would  say  these  machines  are  worked  by  horses,  sometimes  two  being  used,  but 
more  generally  four.  Some  of  the  machines  require  the  horse  to  go  by  the  side  of  the 
standing  grain,  while  the  machine  works  on  one  side.  The  cutting  apparatus  of  others 
is  directly  in  front  of  the  horses.  Some  drop  the  grain  directly  behind,  which  must  be 
bound  before  the  machine  comes  round  again,  while  others  drop  it  at  one  side,  and 
the  whole  field  may  be  cut  before  any  of  it  is  removed.  Some  require  a  man  to  rake 
the  grain  from  them ;  others  are  constructed  for  self-raking,  and  one  has  been  brought 
into  the  field  the  past  season  that  does  its  own  binding.” 


23  Ohio  State  Board  of  Agric.  3d  Annual  Report  (1848),  p.  41;  4th  Annual  Report 

(1849),  pp.  88,  131;  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Reports,  1851,  Agriculture,  434 i 

1852,  p.  274. 

24  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Reports,  1851,  Agriculture,  460. 

25  Cultivator,  new  series,  IX  (1852),  p.  31. 

26  Prairie  Farmer,  X  (1850),  p.  30. 

27  Cultivator,  new  series,  VIII  (1851),  p.  41. 


AGRICULTURAL  MACHINERY 


291 


HEADERS  AND  SELF-RAKERS. 

Aside  from  the  reapers  of  the  Hussey  and  McCormick  type,  headers  at¬ 
tracted  considerable  attention  in  the  prairie  region  during  the  latter  years  of 
the  forties  and  the  early  fifties.  Notable  among  these  was  the  machine  in¬ 
vented  in  1844  by  George  Esterly,  of  Heart  Prairie,  Wisconsin  (fig.  45). 
But  in  competition  with  reapers,  the  headers  failed  to  gain  a  place  in  the 
prairie  region,  owing  to  their  relatively  high  cost  and  to  imperfect  workman- 


Fig.  45. — Esterly’s  header. 


Fig.  46. — The  New  York  self-raking  reaper. 

ship  of  their  complicated  machinery.  It  was  found,  also,  that  the  heads  of 
grain,  if  not  dry  when  cut,  would  shrivel  and  mold  in  the  stack.  This  was 
probably  the  principal  reason  for  the  rejection  of  headers.  They  have  since 
proved  successful  in  dry  regions  where  the  grain  can  be  allowed  to  cure 
properly  before  it  is  cut.  By  1850  the  self-rake  reaper  began  to  come  into  use, 
and  thus  the  work  of  another  man  in  the  harvesting  of  wheat  was  done  by 
machinery.  (See  fig.  46.) 


292 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


GENEVA  TRIALS,  1852,  SHOW  DEFECTS  OF  REAPERS 

AND  MOWERS. 

It  was  difficult  to  determine  which  was  the  best  machine.  In  addition  to  the 
local  trials  held  annually  at  agricultural  fairs  to  test  the  relative  merits  of  the 
several  machines,  there  were  State,  national,  and  even  international  competi¬ 
tions.  At  a  trial  held  by  the  New  York  State  Agricultural  Society  at  Geneva 
in  1852,  9  machines  competed  as  reapers  and  7  as  mowers.  Only  one  or  two 
of  the  reapers  did  fair  work.  Nearly  all  left  the  stubble  very  uneven.  Frequent 
delays  resulted  from  the  breaking  of  parts  or  the  clogging  of  the  cutter-bar. 
The  draught  in  all  of  them  was  very  heavy,  and  some  of  the  best  of  them  had 
a  side-draught  that  was  destructive  to  the  team.  Yet  the  judges  decided  that, 
in  comparison  with  the  hand  cradle,  they  showed  a  saving  of  88}  cents  per 
acre.  Of  the  12  machines  exhibited,  only  2  had  self-rake  attachments.  The 
work  of  the  mowing-machines  was  equally  unsatisfactory.  Only  2  or  3  were 
capable  of  equaling  the  common  scythe  in  the  quality  of  work  performed,  and 
only  one  completed  the  trial  without  clogging.  All  the  machines  had  heavy 
side-draught.  At  the  completion  of  the  trial,  however,  the  committee  reported 
that  “  the  excellence  discernible  in  the  best  Mowing  Machines  now  exhibited, 
leaves  no  doubt  as  to  their  utility.”  28 

VICTORIES  OF  AMERICAN  REAPER  AND  THRESHER  AT 

PARIS,  1855. 

A  year  before  the  Geneva  trial,  an  American  reaping  machine  had  achieved 
international  fame  by  winning  the  medal  in  a  contest  at  the  industrial  exhibi¬ 
tion  in  London  by  cutting  a  strip  of  wheat  74  yards!  in  length  in  70  seconds.29 
At  the  International  Exposition  at  Paris  in  1855,  the  American  machines 
were  again  brought  into  competition  with  the  world.  Three  machines  were 


Table  35.“ 


Wheat  threshed  in 
one  hour. 

Flails  . 

liter's. 

36 

150 

250 

410 

740 

bus. 

•83 

3-45 

5-75 

9-43 

17.02 

French  machine  . 

French  machine  . 

English  machine  . 

Pitt’s  American  machine . 

a  U.  S.  Commissioner  of  Agriculture,  Annual  Report  (1872),  p.  290. 
(A  liter  equals  0.023  bus.) 


entered  for  the  first  trial,  one  American,  one  English  and  a  third  from  Al¬ 
giers — all  self-raking  machines.  The  American  machine  completed  its  work 
in  22  minutes,  the  English  in  66,  and  the  Algerian  in  71.  At  a  later  trial  on 
the  same  field,  three  other  machines  were  entered  of  American,  English,  and 
French  manufacture.  The  American  machine  did  its  work  in  22  minutes, 
while  the  other  two  failed.  At  the  same  exposition  an  American  threshing 


28  N.  Y.  State  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions,  X  (1852),  p.  108. 

29  Ibid.,  IX  (1851),  Appendix,  94. 


AGRICULTURAL  MACHINERY 


293 


machine  won  the  victory  over  several  competing  machines.  To  determine  the 
comparative  rapidity  and  economy  of  threshing  by  hand  and  by  machine,  6 
men  were  set  to  work  with  flails,  with  the  results  shown  in  table  35.  These 
repeated  triumphs  attracted  wide  attention  to  the  improvements  in  agricul¬ 
tural  machinery  in  America. 

During  the  early  fifties  the  reaper  was  gradually  supplanting  the  cradle  in 
the  wheat  fields  of  the  country,  but  as  yet  the  acreage  in  grain  in  the  Western 
States  was  largely  limited  to  the  capacity  of  the  cradle.  As  shown  by  the 
trial  at  Geneva,  the  reaper  was  still  imperfect  and  rather  uncertain.  Moreover, 
in  a  large  part  of  the  West  there  was  little  incentive  to  produce  large  amounts 
of  wheat  on  account  of  the  lack  of  markets  and  low  prices.  Rising  prices  of 
wheat  caused  a  “  boom  ”  in  agriculture  from  1854  to  1857  and  caused  almost 
universal  demand  for  reapers  in  the  wheat-growing  regions.  Wheat  in  New 
York  sold  at  $1.06  in  October  1852,  at  $1.73  in  October  1854,  and  at  $1.80 
in  the  same  month  in  1855.  (See  fig.  66,  p.  313.)  With  the  rapid  extension 
of  railroads  these  increased  prices  were  quickly  reflected  in  the  Western 
States.  When  the  wheat  from  an  acre  of  land  would  sell  for  more  than  the 
price  of  the  land,  it  was  considered  a  safe  investment  to  sow  more  land  in 
wheat  and  buy  a  reaper.  High  prices,  the  California  migration,  and  extensive 
internal  improvements  were  causing  a  pronounced  shortage  of  labor  just  at 
the  time  when  it  was  most  wanted  in  the  wheat  fields.  Reapers  were  intro¬ 
duced  as  fast  as  they  could  be  manufactured. 

SYRACUSE  TRIALS,  1857,  SHOW  STRIKING  IMPROVEMENTS 

IN  REAPERS. 

In  1857,  five  years  after  the  Geneva  trial,  the  United  States  Agricultural 
Society  instituted  a  national  trial  at  Syracuse,  New  York.  More  than  40 
mowers  and  reapers  entered  and  were  brought  to  test  on  the  field.  It  was 
soon  apparent  that  striking  improvements  had  been  made  since  the  meeting 
at  Geneva.  The  draught  had  been  considerably  lessened  in  all  the  machines 
and  the  cutting  apparatus  had  been  much  improved  and  the  construction  was 
more  substantial.  The  best  machine  performed  as  perfectly  at  the  rate  of 
1  mile  an  hour  as  at  3  or  4  miles,  the  rate  formerly  necessary.  On  the  whole, 
the  reaper  had  become  a  reliable  machine.  During  the  late  fifties,  wire-binder 
attachments  for  reapers  began  to  appear  on  the  market,  but  they  were  generally 
unsatisfactory  and  few  were  in  use  before  i860.  The  Marsh  Brothers  built 
their  first  harvester  in  1858,  but  it  was  not  until  1864  that  it  was  successfully 
placed  on  the  market. 

SAVING  IN  LABOR  EFFECTED  BY  REAPERS. 

In  i860  it  was  said  that  the  reaper  had  supplanted  the  cradle  in  the  wheat¬ 
growing  regions,  although  the  latter  was  still  widely  used.  Perhaps  one-half 
of  the  machines  in  use  in  i860  were  self-raking.  The  machines  employing 
the  hand  rake  were  simpler  and  cheaper  and  therefore  still  preferred  by 
many.  In  a  comparison  of  the  reaper  and  cradle  at  the  Geneva  trial,  it  was 
asserted  by  the  committee  in  charge  that  the  cradling  and  binding  of  a  field 
of  15  acres  of  wheat  in  one  day  would  require  14  dr  more  men.  The  reaper, 


294  AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 

on  the  other  hand,  if  it  did  good  work,  would  require  “  two  men  to  control  it 
and  needs  seven,  or  at  most  eight  men  to  rake  and  bind  the  grain  and  shock 
the  whole  in  the  same  day,”  a  total  of  9  men  to  do  the  work  in  one  day.  Fifteen 
acres  was  a  large  area  for  an  early  reaper  to  cut  in  one  day,  but  at  that  rate 
the  saving  of  labor  in  harvesting  wheat  by  the  use  of  the  reaper  would  have 
been  5  men  out  of  14.30  In  addition,  the  reapers  saved  grain;  by  enabling 
the  farmer  to  harvest  his  wheat  within  a  short  time  after  the  grain  ripened 
much  loss  from  shattering  was  prevented. 

DEVELOPMENT  OF  MOWING  MACHINES. 

The  early  mowers  and  reapers  were  usually  made  interchangeable.  By  re¬ 
moving  the  platform  at  the  rear  of  the  cutter-bar,  the  reaper  could  be  trans¬ 
formed  into  a  mower.  Hussey  and  McCormick  offered  their  reapers  as 
mowing  machines,  and  Ketchum,  Emery,  Manny,  Brown,  Mabie,  and  others 


Fig.  47. — Ketchum’s  mowing  machine  (1845). 

The  Ketchum  mower,  first  patented  in  1844  and  again  in  1846  and  1847,  was  the  first 
successful  machine  designed  solely  for  mowing  and  not  combined  with  the  reaper. 

had  mowing  machines  on  the  market.  Of  the  7  machines  on  trial  as  mowers 
at  Geneva,  New  York,  in  1852,  all  but  2  were  also  classed  as  reapers.  Manny  s 
machine  (patented  in  1831)  and  Hussey's  (patented  in  1833)  possessed  many 
of  the  essential  features  of  the  modern  mower ;  but  the  first  successful  ma¬ 
chine  designed  only  as  a  mower  was  that  of  W.  F.  Ketchum,  patented  in 
1844  and  again  in  1847  (%•  4 7)-  Another  early  mowing  machine,  widely 
used  after  1850,  was  that  of  Ebenezer  Danford.  At  the  Syracuse  trial  in  1857, 
15  mowing  machines  were  entered,  9  reapers,  and  14  combined  mowing  and 
reaping  machines.31  At  a  trial  held  under  the  auspices  of  the  Ohio  State 
Board  of  Agriculture  in  the  same  year  12  combined  reapers  and  mowers,  2 
reapers,  and  2  mowers  were  entered.32 


30  N.  Y.  State  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions ,  X  (1852),  p.  116. 

31  U.  S.  Census  of  i860,  Agriculture,  p.  xxi. 

32  Ohio  State  Board  of  Agric'.,  12th  Annual  Report  (1857),  p.  42. 


AGRICULTURAL  MACHINERY 


295 


DEFECTS  OF  EARLY  MOWERS. 

Aside  from  the  many  difficulties  to  be  overcome  in  the  early  reapers,  there 
was  the  additional  requirement  in  the  case  of  the  mowing  machine  of  cutting 
regularly  and  close  to  the  ground.  With  the  early  machine  with  its  single 
drive-wheel  and  rigid  cutter-bar  this  was  almost  impossible,  except  on  a  level 
surface.  Another  objection  to  this  type  of  mower  was  that  the  driver  had 
to  leave  his  seat  at  every  corner  to  avoid  tearing  up  the  sod.33  The  knives 
also  were  apt  to  clog  in  fine  grass. 

At  the  trial  of  reapers  and  mowers  held  by  the  New  York  Society  at 
Geneva  in  1852,  “seven  machines  competed  as  mowers.  Only  two  or  three 


Fig.  48. — The  Wood  mower  (1859). 

It  was  not  until  the  late  fifties  that  the  modern  two-wheel  machine  with  flexible 
cutter  bar  made  its  appearance.  With  its  advent  the  problem  of  a  mower  had  been 
fairly  well  solved. 

....  were  capable  of  equaling  the  common  scythe  in  the  quality  of  work 
they  did,”  all  had  heavy  side-draught,  and  not  one  of  them  “  when  brought  to 
a  stand  in  the  grass,  could  start  again  without  backing  to  get  up  speed.” 
“  None  of  them  could  turn  about  readily  within  a  reasonable  space,”  nor 
without  danger  of  tearing  up  the  sward.  Only  the  Manning,  patented  in  1831, 
and  the  Ketchum  appeared  to  be  capable  of  doing  work  that  was  at  all  satis¬ 
factory.34  The  patents  of  Cyrenus  Wheeler  in  1856  marked  the  beginning  of 
the  modern  two-wheeled  mower  with  a  flexible  cutter-bar,  a  machine  entirely 
distinct  from  the  reaper.  The  transition  to  the  two-wheeled  machines  was, 

33  Country  Gentleman,  V  (1855),  p.  201. 

34  U.  S.  Commissioner  of  Agriculture,  Annual  Report,  1872,  p.  287. 


296 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


however,  by  no  means  abrupt.  The  single-wheeled  mowers  gained  some  of 
the  advantages  of  the  two-wheeled  type  by  the  addition  of  a  small  wheel  at 
the  inner  end  of  the  cutter  bar,  which  allowed  the  operator  to  raise  and  lower 
it  at  will.35  At  the  Syracuse  trial  in  1857  was  evident  that  marked  improve¬ 
ment  had  been  made  in  mowers  as  well  as  in  reapers.  “  Most  of  the  machines 
could  now  cut  fine  and  thick  grass  without  clogging,  ....  but  of  the 
nineteen  that  competed  as  mowers,  only  three  could  start  in  fine  grass  without 

backing . ”  With  the  appearance  of  the  Buckeye  (1856)  and  the 

Wood  (1859)  (fig.  48),  this  important  farm  machine  attained  a  thoroughly 
practical  form.36 

THE  SAVING  OF  LABOR  EFFECTED  BY  MOWING  MACHINES. 

Contrasting  the  mowing  machine  with  the  man  with  the  scythe,  John 
Johnson  wrote  to  the  Country  Gentleman  in  1858: 37 

“  In  the  first  place,  in  this  section  of  the  country,  for  several  years  past,  no  good 
mowers  could  be  hired  for  less  than  $1.50  per  day  and  board,  and  I  never  saw  five 
mowers  together  that  would  average  over  one  acre  each,  daily,  and  seldom  that  where  the 
acre  would  yield  two  tons  of  dry  hay,  and  if  cut  as  close  and  even  as  the  machines,  not 
near  that.  For  years  before  we  had  mowing  machines,  I  often  let  my  mowing  by  the 
acre,  and  paid  from  $1.25  to  $1.50,  beside  board.  Now  I  could  get  any  quantity  I  ever 
had,  or  ever  will  have  to  cut,  done  for  62%  cents  per  acre  by  horses,  and  they  will  cut 
ten  acres  per  day.  The  difference  of  board  of  ten  men  in  place  of  one  man  and  one 
pair  of  horses,  is  no  small  item.  But  we  can  cut  our  grass  at  much  less  expense  with 
our  own  machines  and  horses,  than  to  hire  it  done  at  62 }  cents  per  acre,  as  any  smart  boy, 
or  lazy  farmer,  or  old  man,  can  drive  the  horses,  and  that  is  all  he  has  got  to  do;  and 
farmer’s  horses  would  generally  be  idle  when  he  is  toiling  at  cutting  down  his  grass.” 

THE  HORSE-RAKE. 

For  raking  hay  the  wooden  horse-rake,  which  had  been  introduced  about 
1 820, 38  had  come  into  common  use  and  was  fast  superseding  the  old  hand- 
rake.  A  Connecticut  writer  reported  in  1844  that  “  the  horse  rake  has  recently 
been  introduced  among  us  with  good  results,  enabling  one  man  with  a  horse 
to  do  the  work  of  five  or  six  with  small  rakes.”  39 

The  “common  horse  rake”  (fig.  24,  p.  213)  as  constructed  in  1840  was 
a  simple  affair.  It  consisted  of  15  to  18  wooden  teeth  projecting  from  both 
sides  of  a  head-piece.  Ropes  were  attached  to  this  head-piece  and  the  horse 
was  hitched  to  these  ropes.  In  the  center  were  two  handles  by  which  the  rake 
was  guided.  In  use,  the  teeth  ran  along  flat  upon  the  ground,  passing  under 
and  collecting  the  hay.  When  full,  the  handles  were  thrown  forward,  the 
rake  was  emptied,  and  lifted  over  the  winrow  for  another  load.  The  “  revolv¬ 
ing  wooden  horse  rake  ”  (fig.  25,  p.  214)  was,  however,  in  more  general  use. 
With  this  the  only  labor  in  unloading  each  rakeful  of  hay  was  to  lift  the 
handles  slightly,  causing  the  teeth  to  make  a  semi-revolution  and  drop  the  load 
without  stopping.  It  was  said  that  from  2  to  3  acres  of  hay  an  hour  could 
be  raked  with  this  machine.40 

35  Country  Gentleman,  V  (1855),  p.  201. 

36  U.  S.  Commissioner  of  Agriculture,  Annual  Report,  1872,  p.  288. 

37  Country  Gentleman,  XI  (1858),  p.  193. 

38  American  Farmer,  II  (1820-21),  p.  312. 

39  Cultivator,  new  series,  I  (1844),  p.  123. 

40  Cultivator,  VII  (1840),  p.  89;  Elliott,  Notes  Taken  in  Sixty  Years,  45-47. 


AGRICULTURAL  MACHINERY 


297 


Improvements  had  been  made  in  the  horse-rake  between  1840  and  1850, 
by  the  substitution  of  iron  or  steel  wire  for  wood  in  the  teeth,  but  the  wooden 
revolving  horse  rake  was  still  the  most  widely  used.  In  regions  where  the 
fields  were  rough  or  small,  much  hay  was  still  raked  by  hand.  The  committee 
on  agricultural  implements  for  Norfolk  County,  Massachusetts,  reported  in 
1849  that,  through  strong  attachment  to  old  usage ,  not  one  farmer  in  ten  in  the 
county  used  the  horse  rake.41  Ten  years  later  the  sulky  wire-tooth  rake  was 
rapidly  coming  into  use.  (See  fig.  49.) 


Fig.  49. — Delano’s  horse-rake 

During  the  fifties  the  wheel-horse  rake  with  independent  teeth  began  to  come  into 
use.  One  man  could  operate  it.  A  Massachusetts  farmer  wrote  in  1856,  “  We  formerly 
used  the  revolver  with  good  success,  but  for  the  last  four  or  five  years  we  have  used 
Delano’s  independent  horse  rake  and  like  it  better  than  the  revolver,  as  it  is  easier  for 
the  horses,  easier  for  the  person  who  uses  it,  and  rakes  better  on  uneven  land.” 


OTHER  HAYING  MACHINES. 

Clover-hullers,  hay-forks,  and  hay-balers  were  rapidly  coming  into  use  in 
i860.  In  regions  where  clover  seed  was  grown  a  very  profitable  business  was 
carried  on  by  persons  owning  clover-seed  harvesters  and  hullers,  who  traveled 
from  farm  to  farm  and  gathered  and  cleaned  the  seed.  Some  did  this  on  shares, 
giving  the  farmer  one-third  to  one-half  the  crop,  but  others  charged  a  specified 
price,  usually  about  $1  per  bushel.42  Mowing-machines,  hay-tedders,  horse- 
rakes  and  hay-caps  greatly  lightened  the  labor  and  diminished  the  risk  of 
curing  hay. 

THRESHING  MACHINES. 

Several  methods  of  threshing  were  in  use  in  1840.  Much  of  the  small  grain 
was  still  beaten  out  with  a  flail,  or  trodden  out  by  horses  or  cattle,  according 

41  Mass.  State  Bd.  of  Agric.,  Transactions  of  the  Agricultural  Societies  1849,  P-  295. 

42  Country  Gentleman,  XVI  (i860),  p.  173. 


298 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


to  the  custom  or  convenience  of  the  farmer.  Stationary  and  portable  threshing 
machines  of  various  types  were  in  use  in  the  East,  the  most  popular  of  which 
was  a  simple  device  consisting  of  a  spiked  cylinder  inclosed  in  a  case  and 
mounted  on  a  wooden  frame.  (See  fig.  26,  p.  215.)  Power  was  usually  fur¬ 
nished  by  2  or  4  horses  attached  to  a  sweep.  (See  fig.  50.)  The  whole  machine 


FIG.  50— Warren’s  horse  power  and  threshing  machine. 

This  was  another  early  machine.  A  Massachusetts  farmer  wrote  describing  a  machine 
in  common  use  in  Berkshire  County  in  1839,  “It  performs  its  work  well  and  with  des¬ 
patch.  It  is  moved  by  three  horses  or  by  two  yoke  of  oxen.  The  thrasher  is  placed  on  the 
barn  floor  and  is  connected  by  a  belt  with  the  moving  power  to  which  the  cattle 
attached  in  the  yard.  The  whole  can  be  put  into  a  small  wagon  and  easily  conveyed  from 
place  to  place.  The  cost  is  $75-00.  With  proper  attendance  I  was ^  told,  that  120  bushels 
of  wheat  or  300  bushels  of  oats  might  be  thrashed  by  it  in  a  day. 


Fig.  51. — Pitt’s  thrasher  and  cleanser. 

In  1834  H.  A.  Pitt  of  Winthrop,  Maine,  conceived  the  idea  oi  combining  the  common 
“ground  hog”  thrasher  and  the  fanning  mill.  In  1840  Pitt  moved  to  Albany  and 
began  the  introduction  of  his  machine  into  western  New  York.  From  20  to  25  bushels 
of  wheat  per  hour  was  considered  a  fair  speed  for  a  6  or  8  horse  machine. 

could  be  loaded  in  a  wagon  and  moved  from  place  to  place.  The  winnowing  was 
done  in  a  fan-mill  turned  by  hand.  In  1843  the  committee  on  exhibits  at  the 
New  York  State  Fair  reported  that  in  their  opinion  a  two  or  three  horse  power 
machine  that  would  thresh  from  100  to  150  bushels  of  grain  a  day  with  the 
farmer’s  own  team  and  help  was  generally  desirable.43 


43  N.  Y.  State  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions,  III  (1843),  p.  43- 


AGRICULTURAL  MACHINERY 


299 


After  1840,  Pitt’s  thrasher  and  cleanser  (see  fig.  51)  came  into  rather  gen¬ 
eral  use,  and  by  the  middle  of  the  decade  machines  with  which  the  grain  was 
threshed  and  separated  in  one  operation  were  in  common  use  in  wheat  grow¬ 
ing  sections.44  The  Pitt  machine  of  1840  weighed  about  700  pounds,  was 
about  8  feet  by  2  feet  4  inches  in  size  and  was  driven  by  6  or  8  horses  on  a 
sweep.  It  threshed  from  20  to  25  bushels  of  wheat  an  hour.  Four  hands  were 
required  to  tend  the  machine — one  to  forward  the  bundles,  one  to  feed,  one 
to  measure  and  put  the  grain  into  bags,  and  one  to  pitch  away  the  straw.  Since 
it  could  easily  be  moved  from  place  to  place,  it  was  used  in  the  field  as  well 
as  under  shelter.  By  1843  it  was  reported  that  the  stationary  threshing  ma¬ 
chine  had  practically  gone  out  of  use  in  western  New  York.45 

After  1850  the  enlarged  Pitt  machine  run  by  6  to  8  horses  attached  to  a 
sweep  and  threshing  300  bushels  of  wheat  a  day,  was  commonly  used  by 
the  large  farmers  and  by  men  who  made  it  a  business  to  go  from  farm  to 
farm  and  thresh  by  the  bushel.  The  Wheeler  horse  power  and  thresher,  a 
smaller  machine  driven  by  2  horses  in  a  treadmill  and  threshing  about  150 
bushels  a  day,  was  widely  used  by  the  smaller  farmer.  By  i860  still  further 
improvements  had  been  made  and  in  all  wheat -growing  regions  the  wheat  was 
largely  threshed  and  separated  by  portable  machines,  the  newer  and  larger 
types  of  which  screened  and  cleaned  the  grain. 

SEED  DRILLS. 

In  1840  wheat  was  sown  broadcast  by  hand  and  harrowed  in  with  a  harrow 
or  steel-tooth  cultivator,  but  by  the  middle  of  the  decade  drills  were  coming 
into  use,  and  by  1850  they  were  rather  generally  used  in  the  wheat  regions  of 


Fig.  52. — Henry  W.  Smith’s  seed  drill. 

An  improved  seed  drill  of  the  fifties.  The  teeth  of  this  machine  could 
be  raised  12  to  16  inches  and  thus  pass  over  any  small  obstruction. 


Pennsylvania  and  New  York.  (See  fig.  52.)  The  Pennock  drill,  patented  by 
Moses  Pennock,  of  Chester  County,  Pennsylvania,  was  one  of  the  most  satis¬ 
factory.  This  machine  as  used  in  1847  sowed  7  rows  9  inches  apart  and  about 
3  inches  deep,  the  outside  drills  being  4  feet  6  inches  apart.  The  machine  was 

44  N.  Y.  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions,  III  (1843),  p.  453;  Ohio  State  Board  of  Agriculture, 

1st  Annual  Report  (1846),  p.  27. 

45  N.  Y.  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions,  III  (1843),  p.  453. 


300  AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 

drawn  by  two  horses  and  planted  from  io  to  15  acres  a  day.  The  drill,  how¬ 
ever,  was  not  as  rapidly  adopted  as  the  reaper,  and  until  i860  a  large  part 
of  the  small  grain  in  the  Mississippi  Valley  was  still  sown  broadcast  by  hand. 
West  of  the  Mississippi  the  drill  was  but  little  used. 

CORN  PLANTERS. 

There  was  a  similar  improvement  in  machinery  for  the  planting  and  cultiva¬ 
tion  of  corn.  In  1840  corn  was  dropped  by  hand  and  covered  with  the  hoe 


Fig.  53. — Cole’s  corn  planter. 

The  corn  crop  of  1840  was  planted  with  the  hoe,  the  plow  or  the  ax. 
Drills  of  various  construction,  propelled  by  man  or  horse  power,  were 
upon  the  market,  but  their  use  was  confined  principally  to  sowing  turnips, 
beets  and  other  small  seed. 


Fig.  54. — Billing’s  improved  corn  planter  and  fertilizer. 


During  the  fifties  many  new  machines,  much  improved,  came  into  use, 
some  of  which  dropped  both  seed  and  fertilizer  and  covered  and  rolled  them 
as  fast  as  a  horse  could  walk.  It  was  claimed  (in  1856)  that  the  Billings 
machine,  which  had  the  essentials  of  a  modern  planter,  was  capable  of  plant¬ 
ing  from  6  to  10  acres  per  day. 

or  the  plow.  Hand  planters  and  drills,  it  is  true,  w^ere  used  to  some  extent  in 
the  East,  but  there  was  as  yet  no  satisfactory  machine  for  the  planting  of 
corn.  (Figs.  53  to  56.)  During  the  fifties,  corn  planters  came  rapidly  into 


\ 


Fig.  55. — Randall  &  Jones’  corn  planter. 


During  the  fifties  two-row  planters  which  would  plant  in  check  rows  appeared.  Some 
of  these  were  hand  planters,  one  of  the  most  popular  of  which  was  put  out  by  Randall 
&  Jones.  With  this  machine  the  operator  was  said  to  be  able  to  plant  about  as  fast  as 
he  could  walk. 


Fig.  56. — Brown’s  corn-planter. 


Brown’s  Corn  Planter  was  a  double  machine  drawn  by  two  horses,  planting  two  rows  at 
a  time.  It  required  two  men,  one  to  drive  and  the  other  to  manage  the  lever  by  means  of 
which  the  corn  was  deposited  in  the  ground  at  the  point  desired.  “  This  machine,”  wrote 
one  in  1861,  “  will  plant  12  to  20  acres  in  a  day  and  do  the  work  better  than  a  man  can 
plant  half  an  acre  a  day  with  a  hoe.” 


301 


302 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


use,  and  by  i860  a  large  portion  of  the  com  crop  of  the  West  was  planted 
by  one-row  and  two-row  planters,  hill  planters,  and  drill  planters. 

CULTIVATORS. 

In  1840,  corn  in  the  East  was  cultivated  with  a  hoe  or  with  an  awkward 
and  ineffective  one-horse  cultivator  (fig.  57).  The  teeth,  usually  of  cast-iron, 
were  fastened  to  the  wooden  frame  with  a  short  neck,  rendering  operation 
difficult  on  uneven  land  or  where  there  were  stumps  and  stones  (fig.  58). 
The  plow  for  the  cultivation  of  corn  had  gone  out  of  use  in  the  East.  In  the 


During  the  forties  the  cultivators  were  greatly  improved.  Steel  teeth 
were  substituted  for  iron  and  the  neck  was  considerably  lengthened.  By  the 
late  forties  these  implements  were  supplanting  the  old  method  of  plowing 
the  corn  in  Ohio.  Farther  west  they  were  as  yet  but  little  used. 

West  the  one-horse  plow  or  the  shovel  plow  (fig.  59)  were  the  implements 
commonly  used  for  corn  cultivation.  Later,  about  1850,  another  shovel  had 
been  added  and  the  double-shovel  plow  (fig.  60)  became  common.46  Three- 
shovel  plows  and  steel-tooth  cultivators  were  coming  into  use.  By  i860 
straddle-row  cultivators  of  various  types  had  appeared.47  The  use  of  steel  in 
the  teeth  greatly  increased  the  efficiency  of  the  implement.  A  great  saving 
in  man  and  horse  labor  was  effected  by  the  improvements  in  corn  cultivators 
and  planters  in  the  years  1840  to  i860,  and  in  addition  there  was  a  great 
improvement  in  the  quality  of  work  performed. 


46  Indiana  State  Board  of  Agriculture,  Annual  Report ,  1859,  p.  64. 

47  Country  Gentleman,  XVIII  (1861),  p.  141. 


AGRICULTURAL  MACHINERY 


303 


Fig.  58. — Wheat  cultivator. 

The  wheel  cultivator  was  used  in  the  wheat  regions  of  western  New  York 
and  eastern  Ohio.  It  was  considered  of  great  utility  in  mellowing  fallow 
land  for  wheat  and  destroying  weeds.  The  machine  had  largely  gone  out  of 
use  by  the  late  fifties. 


Fig.  59. — The  shovel  plow. 


304  AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


About  1850  the  double-shovel  plow  came  into  use  in  the  West,  sup¬ 
planting  the  single  shovel. 


During  the  fifties  this  was  a  popular  type  of  harrow  in  New 
York  and  other  eastern  states.  It  was  said  to  possess  many 
advantages  over  the  square  harrow.  The  draft  was  less  and  it 
was  easily  cleared  of  foul  stuff  when  in  operation.  In  Ohio, 
where  it  was  just  coming  into  use  in  1848,  the  price  was  $12. 


AGRICULTURAL  MACHINERY 


305 


SUMMARY. 

The  inventions  and  improvements  which  were  made  in  reapers  and  mowers 
and  in  corn  cultivators  were  probably  the  most  significant  of  all  the  changes 
in  farm  machinery.  In  the  West  the  amount  of  wheat  which  a  farmer  raised 
was  determined  by  the  acreage  that  he  could  effectively  harvest.  His  com 
crop  was  limited  by  the  acreage  that  he  could  cultivate.  Consequently,  the 
introduction  of  reapers  and  cultivators  was  largely  responsible  for  the  rapid 
expansion  of  the  area  of  production  during  this  period.  Once  a  new  machine 
was  invented,  there  was  always  the  question  as  to  whether  it  was  economically 
profitable  to  use  it.  The  reaper  came  into  use  in  the  Eastern  States  earlier 
than  in  the  West.  Although  better  adapted  to  the  level  fields  of  the  West,  its 
introduction  was  at  first  retarded  by  the  low  price  of  wheat  and  by  the  lack 
of  capital  among  the  immigrants.  But  with  the  rising  price  of  wheat  after 
1845,  the  opportunities  for  profitable  use  of  machinery  were  greater  and  its 
introduction  progressed  rapidly. 

In  i860  grain  was  commonly  cut  with  the  reaper,  but  was  still  bound  by 
hand.  The  combined  thresher  and  separator  with  straw-carrier  attachment, 
driven  by  horse  treadmill,  had  come  into  use,  and  steam  threshing  outfits  also 
had  appeared.  1  he  field  drill  and  the  mowing  machine  were  widely  employed. 
The  wheeled  horse-rake  had  begun  to  supplant  the  wooden  revolving  horse- 
rake.  The  steel  plows  had  shown  their  superiority  to  those  of  cast-iron. 
Two-row  corn  planters  and  two-horse  corn  cultivators  were  being  rapidly 
developed.  The  single-shovel  plow  had  given  way  to  the  double-shovel  plow. 
Hay  and  root  cutters  had  been  brought  to  a  considerable  degree  of  perfection. 
Small  tools,  a  factory  product,  now  made  of  steel,  had  been  vastly  improved. 
The  Ohio  farmer  of  i860  who  adopted  the  improved  methods  of  production 
then  available  could  probably  produce  his  crops  with  two-thirds  the  labor 
required  in  1840. 


21 


Chapter  XXIV. — Transportation  and  Markets. 


The  building  of  canals  and  railroads  by  extending  the  markets  for  farm 
products  played  a  leading  part  in  the  expansion  and  transformation  of  agri¬ 
cultural  production  between  1840  and  i860.  The  access  to  new  markets  gave  a 
great  stimulus  to  commercial  agriculture  and  tended  to  break  down  the  tradi¬ 
tional  habits  of  self-sufficient  farming.  Of  particular  significance  was  the 
extension  of  railroads.  In  1840  the  era  of  railroad  building  had  but  just  begun. 
Twenty  years  later  the  northern  States  east  of  the  Mississippi  River  were 
traversed  by  a  network  of  railroads,  affording  new  means  of  communication 
and  new  markets  to  farmers  in  both  East  and  West. 

THE  ERIE  CANAL— CANAL  BUILDING  IN  THE  WEST 

1830  TO  1850. 

The  early  movement  for  better  internal  communication  and  wider  markets 
dating  from  about  1820  had  resulted  in  the  construction  of  a  large  number 
of  turnpikes  and  a  few  canals.  As  far  as  northern  agriculture  was  concerned, 
the  chief  accomplishment  before  1840  was  the  Erie  Canal,  which  was  designed 
to  give  the  productive  western  region  a  new  outlet  to  the  Atlantic  Coast.  Be¬ 
fore  the  period  of  canal  construction,  the  only  outlet  for  western  produce  had 
been  by  fiatboat  or  steamer  down  the  Ohio  and  Mississippi  Rivers  or  overland 
by  road  to  the  Atlantic  seaboard.  The  benefits  of  the  southern  market  were 
reflected  in  the  early  prosperity  of  the  agricultural  regions1  of  the  West  along 
the  Ohio  and  Mississippi  Rivers  and  their  tributaries.  But  for  the  vast  terri¬ 
tory  between  the  Great  Lakes  and  the  Ohio  River  there  was  as  yet  no  outlet 
to  the  East  and  South.  Long  before  Cleveland,  Chicago,  and  Milwaukee  had 
developed  as  lake  ports,  Cincinnati  and  St.  Louis  were  thriving  western 
shipping-points. 

When  the  Erie  Canal  was  completed  in  1825,  giving  a  water-route  from 
the  Atlantic  to  the  Great  Lakes,  freight  rates  dropped  from  $100  a  ton  to  $15 
or  $25.  The  region  of  the  Great  Lakes  was  now  open  to  settlement.  In  1832 
the  completion  of  the  Ohio  Canal  from  Portsmouth  on  the  Ohio  River  to 
Cleveland  opened  the  central  part  of  the  State  and  gave  Ohio  a  short  route  to 
New  York.  In  1834  the  opening  of  the  water  and  rail  route  through  Penn¬ 
sylvania  connected  Pittsburg  with  Philadelphia.  Eleven  years  later  the  Miami 
Canal  connected  Cincinnati  with  the  East  by  way  of  Toledo  and  the  Erie 
Canal.  The  Illinois  and  Michigan  Canal,  connecting  the  Illinois  River  with 
Lake  Michigan,  and  the  Wabash  Canal,  connecting  the  Wabash  River  with 
Lake  Erie,  were  both  completed  before  1851.  (Fig.  62.)  The  Canadian  gov¬ 
ernment  built  the  Welland  Canal  in  1833,  and  the  locks  at  Sault  St.  Marie 
were  finished  in  1855,  thus  removing  the  last  obstacle  in  the  way  of  naviga¬ 
tion  from  the  western  end  of  the  Great  Lakes  to  the  Atlantic  seaboard.1  By 

1  Johnson,  et  al.,  Hist,  of  Domestic  and  Foreign  Commerce  of  the  U.  S.,  I,  p.  227. 

306 


Du/ut/? 


>c//SO'7  ' 

"fiJbuqye 

)  Cfr/fgh 


\  In^vapcns 

'H  4j£“* 

!  .  )i  >  \ 

SJ/ofJ'S  //  5  0 


JopJih^ 


h's 


Pbr¥3xrp/bb  < 

•  •*«■  ■  «»*.■< 

£,**#4  /jtt/ePoc. 

[JWansa^I 


8/rminghf- 


Montgomery^ 


cAsooV 

yAugvs 


Houston 


300M1LE.S 


Miami 


Abandoned  bsfore  1615 
In  use  in  181  1 
Principal  canalized  rivers 


/fey  /o  Termini  of 
Canola  and  Names  of 
Canalized  Rivera. 

1.  Portland 

2.  Lowell 

3.  Boston 

4.  Worcester 

5.  Providence 

6.  Northampton 

7.  New  Haven 

8.  Whitehall 

9.  Albany 

10.  Kingston 

11.  Utica 

12.  Lyons  Falls 

13.  Oswego 

14.  Rome 

15.  Rochester 

16.  Buffalo 

17.  Olean 

18.  Watkins 

19.  Elmira 

20.  Binghamton 

21.  Honesdale 

22.  Mauch  Chunk 

23.  Easton 

24.  Jersey  City 

25.  Philadelphia 

26.  Columbia 

27.  Hollidaysburg 

28.  Bellefonte 

29.  Johnstown 

30.  Pittsburg 

31.  Erie 

32.  Beaver 

33.  Akron 

34.  Toledo 

35.  Columbus 

36.  Portsmouth 

37.  Athens 

38.  Cincinnati 

39.  Lawrenceburg 

40.  Cambridge  City 

41.  Evansville 

42.  Chicago 

43.  Lockport 

44.  LaSalle 

45.  Green  Bay 

46.  Rock  Island 

47.  Cumberland 

48.  Washington 

49.  Richmond 

50.  Buchanan 

51.  Savannah 

52.  New  Orleans 


Canalized  Rivers. 

B.  W.,  Black  Warrior 

G.,  Green 

G.  K.,  Great  Kanawha 

K. ,  Kentucky 

L.  K.f  Little  Kanawha 
Mg.,  Muskingum 
Mn.,  Monongahela 


Fig.  62. - CANALS  IN  THE  UNITED  STATES 

(Adapted  from  Meyer,  History  of  Transportation  in  the  U.  S.,  Plate  2.) 


I 

i 


DufoZ/r 


>c//Son  JS 

"JpJbuqye  S 
)  Cfrjosgo 


1  S  .  £  i 

fnc/ianapohs  \ 


,  %Dafro 

',  O'ncin**** 

\//Svi^e 


£55  Ej£  L 


Zz>f-/Z?m/Zh  ( 

*  -^^A 

Jj'ZZZePoc, 

P^ansaJ 


^  I  8irrninghf> 


41  pfgcon 


A  BAM  A  V] 
w^42. 

tfontgorr>eryl 


Jgcks(?n  i 

p  %9  j  • 
V/c/csburg  I 


,  cAsonvt 

-JAogvs 


\ rahassee 

'\fslaika 


300  M1LE.S 


Mis'711 


yN^ 

M  I  8|8  0  U  B  I  N">  i  rfff‘  u\c  £" 

■  - A-yf/7TT\--' 

- D?S&>  OA 


sZon 


Termini  of  Railroads, 

1840. 

1.  Orono 

2.  Exeter 

3.  Nashua 

4.  New  Bedford 

5.  Stonington 

6.  Norwich 

7.  Springfield 

8.  Hartford 

9.  Bridgeport 

10.  New  Milford 

11.  State  Line 

12.  Troy 

13.  Hudson 

14.  Saratoga  Springs 

15.  Schenectady 

16.  Ithaca 

17.  Owego 

18.  Rochester 

19.  Batavia 

20.  Niagara  Falls  and 

Lewiston 

21 .  Lockport 

22.  Corning 

23.  Blossburg 

24.  Carbondale 

25.  Honesdale 

26.  Morristown 

27.  Hicksville 

28.  Plainfield 

29.  South  Amboy 

30.  Reading 

31.  Ralston 

32.  Williamsport 

33.  Hagerstown 

34.  Winchester 

35.  Fredericksburg 

36.  Weldon 

37.  Orangeburg 

38.  Madison 

39.  Tennille 

40.  Macon 

41.  Barnesville 

42.  Franklin 

43.  Tuscumbia 

44.  Decatur 

45.  Port  Hudson 

46.  Clinton 

47.  Frankfort 
48  Lexington 

49.  Madison 

50.  Vernon 

51.  Meredosia 

52.  Jacksonville 

53.  Carey 

54.  Sandusky 

55.  Monroe 

56.  Adrian 

57.  Ann  Arbor 

58.  Birmingham 

59.  Johnstown 

60.  Hollidaysburg 

61.  Gordonsville 


?ig.  63. - RAILROADS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES  IN  OPERATION  IN  1840 


(Adapted  from  Meyer,  History  of  Transportation  in  the  V.  S.,  Plate  3.) 


Du/uhh 


M/nne&pcJi 


rf,/wqtjke& 

Mon  |  j 

tiJ6uqt{e  !jv 

j  Cfyc&go 


xfO'nc/nne’ 

)~'v'5liL5C 

%rrc>nf<for+ 


■f/otfts 


fash  vf/ls 


\hvrtSVn/hh 
*  •**- 


v^Or/eans 


hfoushon 


300  MILES 


ramp& 


,y  L  Mis'01 


Jih Joseph 

oefa  _ ^  . 

•  |C /fahsa/sJ(ry 

j,  !  Jetfersc 

%  I  MISSOURI 

Jop/,\  5Pnngf'e/d_ 


lov  e  _ - 

!  &rrn/2&yfiR 

4 - - - - - ^  IaLABA'^  \  6  E  OK^V'  U 

•  Shheveporr\  Jacfapn  •  *r  >  $s\0nn*f 

1  -  Ssj&i  j 

li  *  ri  jrx-7 — "A  _ s^XcAsonv,//e 

x  A  s  ;  -  tew  \  jfoAss^'  i\ W**** 


'ig.  64. - RAILROADS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES  IN  OPERATION  IN  1850 

(Adapted  from  Meyer,  History  of  Transportation  in  the  U.  S.,  Plate- 4.) 


# 

. 


' 


65° 


Du'tutA 


V  fihnne<spc/{ 


OsAJ<os> 


S/ou +  C/Vy 

Fort  dpi 
^  1  O  W| 

\  Des  Ffb/~ 


girmtn. 


,cte°nv' 

'j-AugaS 


300  MILES 


Mi&rf1 


j  M  1  s's  0  U  R  j 

jZ/’\  ^pnogf^ 
i _ 


AN  SAsi 

:\b  Hi  M 


:  x  as 


Fig.  65. - RAILROADS  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES  IN  OPERATION  IN  1860 

(Adapted  from  Meyer,  History  of  Transportation- in  the  U.  S.,  Plate  5.) 


' 


TRANSPORTATION  AND  MARKETS  307 

1840  freight  began  to  move  east  and  west,  as  well  as  north  and  south,  accord¬ 
ing  to  the  condition  of  the  market. 

BEGINNING  OF  GRAIN  TRADE  ON  THE  LAKES. 

As  late  as  1835,  Ohio  was  the  only  grain-exporting  territory  on  the  Great 
Lakes.  A  year  later  the  first  shipment  of  grain  was  made  from  Lake  Michi¬ 
gan,  “  when  the  brig  John  H.  Kenzie  took  on  board  at  Grand  Haven,  Michi¬ 
gan,  3,000  bushels  of  wheat  for  the  port  of  Buffalo.”  The  first  shipment  of 
grain  from  the  west  shore  of  Lake  Michigan  consisted  of  39  bags  sent  from 
Chicago  in  1838.  In  1845,  I33>00°  bushels  were  shipped  from  Chicago;  in 
1848,  after  the  opening  of  the  Illinois  Canal,  1,066,000  bushels  were  shipped. 
It  was  not  until  1841  that  the  movement  of  grain  from  Wisconsin  began  with 
the  shipment  of  about  4,000  bushels  of  wheat  from  Milwaukee.2 

RAILROAD  BUILDING  AND  ITS  RESULTS. 

During  the  forties,  steamboats,  turnpikes,  and  canals  furnished  transporta¬ 
tion  for  western  produce,  but  these  means  were  entirely  inadequate.  (Fig. 
63.)  The  railroads  played  the  chief  part  in  the  extension  of  markets  and  the 
development  of  new  territory  during  the  period  from  1840  to  i860.  There 
were  only  a  little  more  than  2,000  miles  of  railroad  in  the  United  States  in 
1840,  three-fourths  of  which  lay  north  of  Virginia  and  east  of  Ohio.  By  1850 
the  mileage  had  increased  to  more  than  7,000,  over  one-half  of  which  was  in 
the  northeastern  States  and  less  than  800  miles  in  the  northwestern.3  Boston 
was  connected  with  the  Erie  Canal  at  Albany  by  railroad  in  1841.  The  first 
railroad  in  Ohio,  about  30  miles  in  length,  extending  from  Toledo  northwest¬ 
ward  into  Michigan  was  finished  in  1836.4  The  decade  1850  to  i860  wit¬ 
nessed  rapid  railroad  extension  and  improvement.  The  situation  in  1851  is 
thus  described  by  McMaster : 5 

“  During  1851  more  than  twenty-one  hundred  miles  of  railroad  were  built  and  a  new 
era  opened.  The  day  of  short  roads  joining  the  termini  of  steamboat  navigation  on 
neighboring  rivers,  or  some  important  nearby  cities  or  towns  was  gone,  and  the  day 
of  the  trunk  line  was  dawning.” 

In  1850  the  New  York  Central  made  a  through  connection  with  the  Great 
Lakes.  The  Pennsylvania  Railroad  was  opened  to  Pittsburg  in  1852;  in  the 
following  year  the  Baltimore  and  Ohio  reached  Wheeling.  Chicago  was  con¬ 
nected  with  New  York  by  railroad  in  1852, 6  and  in  1854  the  Mississippi  was 
reached.7  By  i860  railroads  had  extended  beyond  the  Mississippi  into  eastern 
Iowa  and  had  reached  the  western  frontier  of  agricultural  production. 

In  the  five  states  of  Ohio,  Indiana,  Illinois,  Michigan,  and  Wisconsin  there 
were  in  i860  approximately  9,500  miles  of  railroad.  (Fig.  65.)  The  total 
for  the  entire  country  was  30,626  miles.  Of  the  exports  from  Chicago  in 
1858,  $21,000,000  worth  was  sent  by  lake  vessels,  $1,000,000  worth  by  canal, 

2  U.  S.  Census  of  i860,  Agriculture,  p.  cxlvi. 

3  Am.  Statistical  Annual  (1854-55),  p.  146. 

4  Niles  Register,  LI  (1836),  p.  272. 

5  History  of  the  People  of  the  United  States,  VIII,  89. 

0  Meyer,  History  of  Transportation  in  the  United  States,  511. 

'Ibid.,  512,  513. 


308 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


and  $60,000,000  worth  by  railroad.8  20  per  cent  of  the  flour,  70  per  cent 
of  the  packing-house  products,  and  all  of  the  livestock  were  shipped  by  rail, 
while  nearly  all  the  wheat  went  by  way  of  the  lakes.  Of  the  livestock  received 
at  Chicago  in  that  year  all  the  hogs  came  by  railroad ;  of  the  140,000  cattle 
received,  9  animals  came  by  way  of  the  lake,  21,000  were  driven  in,  and  the 
remainder  came  by  railroad.9  It  was  estimated  in  1862  that  two-thirds  of  the 
freight  to  and  from  the  West  was  moved  by  railroads.10 

MARKETS. 

The  markets  of  this  period  were  mainly  domestic.  The  development  of 
trade  and  manufacturing  in  the  East  and  the  expansion  of  specialized  agricul¬ 
ture,  cotton,  sugar,  and  rice  planting,  in  the  South  created  large  markets  in 
those  regions  for  the  surplus  produce  of  the  North.  The  California  migration 
after  1849  opened  an  important  market  for  the  upper  Mississippi  region.  In 
Maine,  Michigan,  and  Wisconsin  the  lumber  camps  furnished  a  considerable 
market,  while  in  the  West  the  demands  of  newly  arrived  immigrants  created  a 
local  market.  The  Eastern  States  were  consuming  western  wheat,  corn,  pork, 
and  beef  before  1840.  The  industrial  communities  provided  a  home  market 
also  for  food  products  of  the  eastern  farmer.  In  the  newly-settled  West  the 
question  of  finding  an  outlet  for  the  surplus  products  was  uppermost  in  1840. 
There  were  thus  far  two  main  outlets  for  this  surplus,  one  down  the  Mississ¬ 
ippi  River,  the  other  through  the  Erie  Canal  to  the  East. 

COMPETITION  OF  SOUTHERN  AND  EASTERN  MARKETS 

FOR  WESTERN  PRODUCE. 

Down  the  Mississippi  River  by  flatboat  or  steamer  was  the  main  outlet  for 
the  surplus  products  of  the  early  settlers.  In  1840,  Cincinnati,  Louisville, 
Pittsburg,  and  St.  Louis  were  the  important  commercial  centers  of  the  West. 
Cincinnati  was  widely  known,  both  at  home  and  abroad,  as  the  pork-packing 
center  of  America.  It  was  not  until  after  1850  that  the  number  of  hogs 
packed  at  Chicago  exceeded  the  number  packed  at  Alton,  Beardstown,  Peoria, 
and  other  Illinois  towns  for  the  southern  market.11 

While  the  Erie  Canal  carried  each  year  an  increasing  volume  of  surplus 
food  products  to  the  Atlantic  seaboard  from  the  West,  the  shipments  of  flour, 
grain,  and  provisions  down  the  Ohio  and  Mississippi  Rivers  also  steadily 
increased.  In  1840  the  products  of  the  Ohio  Valley  up  as  far  as  Wheeling 
went  south.  The  rivalry  of  the  eastern  canals  and  waterways  was  not  felt 
at  Cincinnati  until  1850,  when  the  railroads  began  to  compete  for  the  traffic  in 
flour  and  provisions.  In  the  three  years  ending  August  31,  1852,  Cincinnati 
shipped  down  the  river,  1,091,000  barrels  of  flour,  while  to  the  North  and  East 
were  sent  37,600  barrels.  Of  the  latter,  only  10,400  barrels  went  by  canal  and 
railroads.12  In  the  three  years  ending  August  31,  i860,  there  were  shipped 

8  Chicago  Board  of  Trade,  Annual  Report  (1858),  p.  6. 

9  Ibid.,  8,  26. 

10  U.  S.  Census  of  i860,  Agriculture,  p.  clxvi. 

11  Alton  (III.)  Telegraph  (1849),  p.  2. 

12  Cincinnati  Chamber  of  Commerce,  Annual  Report  (1852),  p.  13. 


TRANSPORTATION  AND  MARKETS 


309 


down  the  river  300,000  barrels  of  flour,  while  to  the  North  and  East  were  sent 
1,376,000  barrels,  and  of  these  890,000  barrels  went  by  canal  and  railway.13 

By  x$55  value  of  the  total  exports  from  Cincinnati  to  the  East  was 
nearly  equal  to  the  value  of  its  exports  to  the  South,14  and  in  i860  practically 
all  the  wheat  shipped  from  Cincinnati  was  sent  north  and  east.16  The  shift 
in  the  pork  and  bacon  trade  of  Cincinnati  was  similar  to  that  in  flour.  In  the 
three  years  ending  Augpst  31,  1852,  there  were  shipped  down  the  river  in 
barrels  and  hogsheads,  55 * »ooo  barrels  of  pork  and  bacon;  for  the  three  years 
ending  August  31,  i860,  these  shipments  amounted  to  only  234,000  barrels.16 
In  1850  St.  Louis  outranked  Cincinnati  as  a  southern  shipping-point.  An 
increasing  portion  of  the  supplies  going  south  came  from  points  on  the  Mis¬ 
souri  River.  The  shipments  from  Cincinnati  went  north  and  east.17 

Of  the  products  sent  down  the  Mississippi  River  a  considerable  portion  was 
consumed  on  the  cotton  and  sugar  plantations.  From  1830  to  i860  the 
cultivation  of  cotton  had  proven  so  profitable  in  the  South  that  the  planters 
of  the  Cotton  Belt  were  putting  all  their  land,  into  cotton  culture  and  securing 
from  the  North  much  of  the  livestock,  feed,  and  food  needed  on  the  plantation. 
In  1845  ^  was  estimated  that  in  the  preceding  20  years  southern  planters 
had  expended  $900,000,000  in  the  North  for  horses,  mules,  cattle,  sheep, 
hogs,  hay,  and  farm  equipment.18  The  grain,  flour,  packing  house  products, 
and  dairy  products  were  sent  south  on  the  river,  but  the  trade  in  livestock 
was  overland.  Each  year  large  droves  of  horses,  mules,  cattle,  and  hogs  were 
driven  south  from  the  border  States.  The  old  “  cowpens  ”  of  the  South, 
which  had  begun  to  fall  into  decay  and  disuse  after  the  Revolution,  acquired 
a  new  lease  of  life.  They  were  used  as  stock-stands  for  the  accommodation 
over  night  of  hog-drivers  from  the  North,  who  came  through  each  season 
with  thousands  of  animals.  It  was  said  in  1841  that  10,000  horses  and  mules 
were  driven  from  the  Middle  Atlantic  and  Western  States  every  year  into  the 
South,  to  stock  the  plantations  there.19 

WESTERN  PRODUCTS  EXPORTED  FROM  SOUTHERN  PORTS. 

Not  all  the  products  sent  down  the  Mississippi  River  during  this  period, 
however,  were  consigned  for  consumption  in  the  Southern  States ;  a  consider¬ 
able  portion  was  exported  to  coastwise  or  foreign  ports.  During  the  three 
years  1843  to  1845,  1,874,000  barrels  of  flour  were  received  at  New  Orleans, 
and  of  this  number  about  721,000  barrels  were  for  southern  consumption. 
Shipments  to  foreign  countries,  Cuba  included,  were  505,000  barrels.  The 
remainder,  648,000  barrels,  went  to  coastwise  ports;  469,000  barrels  went  to 
New  York  and  Boston  alone.  During  the  same  years  847,000  barrels  of  pork 
and  58,000  casks  of  bacon  were  sent  to  coastwise  or  foreign  ports  from  New 

13  Ibid.,  (i860),  p.  44. 

Ibid.,  (1856),  pp.  25,  29,  Johnson,  et  al.,  History  of  Domestic  and  Foreign  Commerce 
of  the  United  States,  I,  245;  Internal  Commerce  of  the  United  States,  U.  S.  Bureau 
of  Statistics  (1882),  App.  7,  p.  83. 

15  Cincinnati  Chamber  of  Commerce,  Annual  Report  (i860),  p.  44. 

™  Ibid.,  (1852),  p.  13;  (i860),  p.  44. 

17  U.  S.  Census  of  i860,  Agriculture,  p.  clvii. 

18  Ingle,  Southern  Sidelights,  55  et  seq. 

19  Buckingham,  Slave  States,  II,  203. 


310 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


Orleans.20  After  1850  the  shipment  of  packing-house  products  from  New 
Orleans  decreased.  Flour  shipments  continued  much  as  during  the  preceding 
decade,  the  supply  being  drawn  largely  from  Missouri  River  points.  Consider¬ 
ing  the  entire  domestic  grain  trade,  however,  it  may  be  said  that  by  i860  the 
Mississippi  River  as  an  outlet  to  the  ocean  for  the  trade  of  the  West  was 
becoming  relatively  less  important.  Canals  and  railroads  were  now  carrying  the 
surplus  to  the  East. 


Table  36  — Shipments  from  Nezv  Orleans  of  certain  farm  products  for  the  year  ending 

August  31,  18593 


Destination. 

Commodities. 

Flour. 

Pork. 

Bacon. 

Lard. 

Beef. 

Corn. 

New  York  . 

Boston  . 

bbU. 

71,286 

247,516 

3  062 

bbls. 

10,231 

35,435 

40 

casks. 

1,820 

2,122 

kegs. 

117,479 

74,581 

bbls. 

5,713 

6,357 

40 

sacks. 

I2,8l9 

7,415 

rnnaaeipnia  . 

300 

25,147 

Other  coast  ports . 

Total  coastwise  shipments 

Great  Britain  . 

Cuba  . 

Other  foreign  ports . 

Total  foreign  shipments. 

All  shipments  . 

165,397 

3B547 

22,012 

1,720 

106,138 

487,261 

77,253 

29,389 

214,072 

13,830 

126,372 

6,469 

4,052 

107,778 

642 

1,290 

3,679 

2,130 

358 

63.199 

187,190 

34,855 

4,877 

i,450 

1,656 

1,000 

7,980 

40,231 

118,299 

5  611 

2,488 

285,244 

7,983 

49,211 

605,560 

82,864 

31,877 

499,316 

1 

21,813 

175,583 

a  De  Bow’s  Review,  XXVII  (1859),  p.  479. 


GROWTH  OF  THE  GRAIN  TRADE  OF  BUFFALO  AND  CHICAGO. 

After  1836  the  growth  of  the  grain  trade  to  the  East  via  the  Great  Lakes 
and  the  Erie  Canal  was  rapid.  The  Mississippi  River  was  no  longer  the 
sole  outlet  for  the  Great  Valley.  Of  the  wheat  and  flour  shipped  from  Ohio  in 
1845,  700,000  barrels  were  loaded  at  ports  on  Lake  Erie  and  220,000  barrels 
were  sent  from  Ohio  River  points.21  Receipts  at  Buffalo  on  the  western  end  of 
the  Erie  Canal  give  a  valuable  index  of  the  growth  of  the  lake  traffic  in  grain 
and  flour.  In  1836,  1,239,000  bushels  of  grain  and  flour  entered  the  city  from 
the  west;  in  1851  the  figure  was  17,741,000  bushels,  and  in  i860,  37,053,000 
bushels.22  “  As  early  as  1838  the  receipts  of  wheat  and  flour  at  Buffalo  ex¬ 
ceeded  those  at  New  Orleans.”  23  At  first  the  grain  received  at  Buffalo  came 
from  Ohio,  but  as  settlement  and  the  railroads  expanded  into  Michigan, 
Indiana,  Illinois,  Wisconsin,  and  Iowa,  the  sources  of  the  grain-supply  moved 
further  west.  Chicago  shipped  78  bushels  of  grain  in  1838,  1,831,000  bushels 
in  1850,  and  31,109,000  bushels  (grain  and  flour  equivalent)  in  i860.24  In 

20  De  Bou/s  Review,  II  (1846),  p.  422. 

21  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report,  1845,  p.  367. 

22  Buffalo  Board  of  Trade,  Annual  Report  (1869),  p.  20. 

23  U.  S.  Census  of  i860,  Agriculture ,  pp.  cxlviii,  clvi;  Johnson,  et  al.,  History  of  Domestic 

and  Foreign  Commerce  of  the  United  States,  I,  p.  231. 

24  Chicago  Board  of  Trade,  Annual  Report  (1867),  p.  35. 


TRANSPORTATION  AND  MARKETS 


311 


i860  the  shipments  of  grain  from  all  the  ports  on  Lake  Michigan  amounted 
to  43,211,000  bushels.2'1  In  1862  the  Chicago  hog  pack  passed  the  half  million 
mark,  and  from  that  date  Chicago  led  Cincinnati  as  the  western  packing 
center.26  By  1858  the  movement  of  flour  and  grain  to  the  latter  port  for  ship¬ 
ment  southward  had  become  of  relatively  small  importance. 

After  1850  through  traffic  to  the  east  over  the  railroads  increased  rapidly  in 
volume  and  another  artery  of  trade  leading  from  the  west  to  the  east  was 
opened.  By  i860  the  railroads  were  carrying  practically  all  of  the  livestock 
and  two-thirds  of  the  flour  traffic  to  the  East,27  but  the  total  traffic  over  the 
four  trunk  lines  was  not  yet  as  large  as  that  passing  through  the  Erie  Canal.28 
One  of  the  advantages  of  the  railroads  over  the  canals  as  a  means  of  market¬ 
ing  lay  in  their  availability  during  all  the  year.  Formerly,  grain,  butter,  and 
wool  were  sent  east  only  during  the  season  of  canal  navigation  ;  livestock  could 
not  be  driven  east  during  the  winter  months.  After  the  railroads  began  to 
carry  freight,  a  year-round  market  was  available  to  the  western  farmer. 

THE  EASTERN  MARKET  FOR  WESTERN  PRODUCTS. 

By  i860  the  eastern  industrial  States  provided  the  leading  market  for 
the  surplus  products  of  the  West.  The  development  of  manufacturing  and 
commerce  resulted  in  the  growth  of  cities  and  an  increase  in  population  wholly 
dependent  upon  the  farmer  for  food.  As  wheat  and  pork  became  cheaper,  the 
New  Englander  consumed  more,  while  the  eastern  farmer  produced  less.  In 
1840,  receipts  of  flour  at  Boston  amounted  to  530,000  barrels  and  in  1850  to 
761,000  barrels,29  an  increase  of  nearly  50  per  cent.  At  the  same  date,  railroads 
from  the  West,  also,  were  distributing  large  quantities  of  flour  in  the  interior. 
Somewhat  later  we  find  that  over  one-third  of  the  flour  shipped  from  Albany 
and  Troy  over  the  Western  Railroad  did  not  reach  Boston.30  In  the  twenty 
years  from  1840  to  i860  the  deficit  of  New  England  in  wheat  increased  from 
8,000,000  to  13,000,000  bushels.  The  States  along  the  Atlantic  coast,  which 
in  1840  produced  a  little  more  than  enough  to  supply  their  own  needs,  by 
1859-60  had  a  deficit  of  nearly  15,000,000  bushels,  an  amount  greater  than 
that  which  was  exported.  The  New  England  States  which  were  producing 
1  bushel  of  wheat  per  capita  in  1840  produced  only  one-third  of  a  bushel  in 
i860.  New  York  and  Pennsylvania,  which  raised  6  bushels  per  capita  in  1840, 
were  producing  only  3  bushels  in  i860,  as  a  result  both  of  decreased  production 
and  increase  in  population.  The  Western  States,  on  the  other  hand,  were  rais¬ 
ing  7.4  bushels  of  wheat  per  capita  in  1840  and  13.3  bushels  in  i860.  Of  corn, 
the  Western  States  were  producing  33  bushels  per  capita  in  1840  and  45.7 
bushels  in  i860.  What  was  true  of  wheat  and  corn  was  likewise  true  of  beef 
and  pork  products.  Thus  there  was  rapidly  developing  that  close  dependence 
between  East  and  West,  whereby  the  West  furnished  a  market  for  the  capital 
and  manufactured  products  of  the  East,  while  the  East  provided  a  growing 
market  for  the  farm  products  of  the  West. 

2rj  U.  S.  Census  of  i860,  Agriculture,  p.  cl. 

26  Chicago  Board  of  Trade,  Annual  Report  (1862),  p.  32. 

27  U.  S.  Census  of  i860,  Agriculture,  p.  clvii. 

28  Johnson,  et  al.,  History  of  Domestic  and  Foreign  Commerce  of  the  U.  S\,  I,  p.  238. 

29  Boston  Board  of  Trade,  6th  Anunal  Report  (i860),  p.  63. 

80  Ibid.,  2d  Annual  Report  (1856),  p.  55. 


312 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


EXPORT  MARKETS. 

Comparatively  little  was  exported  except  during  the  middle  years  of  the 
decade  1850-1860.  Hog  products,  cheese,  tallow,  and  corn  showed  consider¬ 
able  increases  in  the  amounts  exported  during  the  decade  1840-1850.  The 
Irish  famine  in  the  late  forties  greatly  tended  to  encourage  the  exportation 
of  grain  to  the  United  Kingdom.  During  the  next  decade,  in  the  years 
1854  to  1856,  the  exportation  of  nearly  all  foodstuffs  rose  to  the  highest 
points  yet  reached,31  owing  to  the  high  prices  accompanying  the  Crimean 
War.  The  value  of  the  exports  of  hogs  and  hog  products  rose  from 
$4,368,000  in  1851  to  $12,771,000  in  1856.32 


Table  37. — Exports  of  breadstuffs.* 


Year. 

Value  of 
exports  of 
breadstuff  s. 

Year. 

I 

Value  of 
exports  of 
breadstuffs. 

Year. 

Value  of 
exports  of 
breadstuffs. 

Year. 

Value  of 
exports  of 
breadstuffs. 

1840 

1841 

1842 

1843 

1844 

$13,535,926 

10,254,377 

9,878,176 

5,249,600 

8,93L396 

1845 

1846 

1847 

1848 

1849 

$7,445,820 

16,625,407 

53,262.437 

22,678,602 

22,895,783 

1850 

1851 

1852 

1853 

1854 

$13,066,509 

14,556,236 

17,256,803 

21,875,878 

48,383,107 

1855 

1856 

1857 

1858 

1859 

$21,557,854 

56  619,986 
55,624,832 
33,698,490 
24,893,413 

a  U.  S.  Census  of  i860,  Agriculture,  p.  cxli. 


PRICES— EXPLANATION  OF  WIDE  GEOGRAPHIC  VARIATIONS. 

A  most  interesting  characteristic  of  the  prices  of  farm  products  was  the 
wide  variation  in  the  prices  prevailing  at  any  time  throughout  the  country 
(charts,  pp.  313-31 5).  In  the  East,  nearness  to  market  made  prices  rela¬ 
tively  high,  while  in  the  West  lack  of  markets  and  abundance  of  productive 
territory  made  them  relatively  low.  Within  the  Eastern  States  themselves 
there  wras  a  similar  variation  in  prices,  according  to  location.  Northern  New 
Hampshire  was  relatively  farther  from  the  Boston  market  in  1840  than  Wis¬ 
consin  is  to-day.  With  the  extension  of  railroads,  however,  the  markets  of  the 
industrial  and  export  centers  were  made  accessible  to  broader  areas  of  agri¬ 
cultural  production,  and  the  farm  price  of  products  in  the  interior  tended  to 
approach  the  New  York  price.  During  the  year  1843,  the  Cincinnati  price  of 
hogs  averaged  $2.04  per  hundred,  while  at  New  York  the  average  price  was 
$4.33.  Wheat  during  the  two  years  1847  and  1848  at  New  York  averaged 
$1.31  per  bushel ;  the  Chicago  price  was  $0.70,  a  difference  of  $0.61  per  bushel. 
During  the  two  years  1857  and  1858  the  New  York  price  averaged  $1.32  per 
bushel,  the  Chicago  price,  $0.90,  a  difference  of  $0.42  per  bushel.33  Before 
the  era  of  railroads  wheat  was  frequently  sold  in  the  interior  counties  of 
the  West  as  low  as  37  cents  and  corn  at  10  cents  per  bushel.34  Farther 

31  U.  S.  Census  of  i860,  Agriculture,  p.  cxli. 

82  U.  S.  Commerce  and  Navigation,  1851,  p.  15;  (1856),  pp.  16-19.  For  a  discussion 

of  foreign  and  domestic  trade  of  this  period,  see  Johnson  et  al.,  History  of  Domestic 
and  Foreign  Commerce  of  the  United  States,  I,  ch.  XIV ;  II,  ch.  XXI V. 

83  Aldrich  Report  U.  S.,  52nd  Cong.,  2d  sess.,  Senate  Report  No.  1394  (1893),  part  2, 

pp.  27,  28,  60-63. 

34  U.  S.  Census  of  i860,  Agriculture,  p.  clxviii. 


TRANSPORTATION  AND  MARKETS 


313 


Fig.  66. — Price  of  wheat,  1840-1859. 

During  the  early  years  the  price  of  wheat  in  Chicago  was  fairly 
independent  of  that  in  New  York.  The  years  1854,  1855,  and  1856, 
brought  relatively  high  prices  to  the  wheat  farmer  in  both  East 
and  West. 


314  AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 

inland,  grain  was  not  worth  hauling  to  market.  In  January  1845,  corn  was 
quoted  in  New  York  at  48  cents  per  bushel,  in  Chicago  at  35  cents,  at  LaFay- 
ette,  Indiana,  on  the  Wabash  Canal,  with  outlet  to  New  Orleans  or  the  Erie 


The  year  1845  marked  the  beginning  of  a  considerable  rise  in  the  price  of  corn.  Until 
about  1850  the  price  of  corn  fluctuated  more  or  less  independently  on  the  New  York 
and  Cincinnati  markets. 


Fig.  68. — Price  of  hogs,  1840-1859. 

The  price  of  hogs  rose  in  1846  and  again  after  1850.  As  with  corn,  New  York  and 
Cincinnati  prices  were  more  or  less  independent  until  about  1850. 


Canal,  as  low  as  20  cents  per  bushel.35  In  Shelby  County,  Indiana,  85  miles 
from  Cincinnati,  without  water  or  rail  transportation,  the  cost  of  hauling  by 
wagon  was  said  to  be  so  heavy  as  to  prohibit  the  cultivation  of  corn  or  wheat 
beyond  the  necessity  for  home  consumption  or  to  feed  to  livestock.36  With 


35  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report,  1845,  P-  384- 

36  Indiana  State  Board  of  Agriculture,  Annual  Report,  1851,  p.  180. 


TRANSPORTATION  AND  MARKETS  315 

the  extension  of  railroads  and  other  means  of  transportation,  prices  advanced 
noticeably  in  regions  within  the  reach  of  the  new  facilities.37 

Considerable  fluctuation  of  prices  occurred  during  the  period  1840  to  i860. 
(Figs.  66,  67,  68,  69,  70.)  In  the  early  forties  there  was  a  depression  in 
prices  following  the  panic  of  1837.  In  the  East  the  low  prices  had  led  to  con- 


Fig.  69. — Price  of  Beeves,  1840-1859. 


Fig.  70. — Prices  of  butter  and  cheese,  1840-1859. 

During  the  fifties  the  price  of  butter  relative  to  cheese  was  higher  than  in  the 
previous  decade. 


siderable  hardship,  especially  among  wool  growers,  and  in  the  West  it  had 
intensified  the  difficulty  of  finding  a  market.  In  1846-47  prices  revived  con¬ 
siderably  in  both  East  and  West,  and  agriculture  entered  into  a  period  of 
unusual  prosperity.  Later,  during  the  middle  years  of  the  fifties,  the  unusual 
demand  for  wheat  for  export  markets  brought  high  prices  to  the  farmer  who 
grew  wheat.  A  period  of  low  prices  followed  the  panic  of  1857. 


37  U.  S.  Census  of  i860,  Agriculture,  p.  clxvii. 


Chapter  XXV. — Diffusion  of  Information. 

periodicals. 

The  establishment  of  the  American  Farmer  at  Baltimore  by  Mr.  John  T. 
Skinner  in  1819  marked  the  beginning  of  agricultural  journalism  in  the  United 
States.  Under  the  theory  that  “  knowledge  is  power,”  the  editor  stated  in 
his  first  issue : 1 

“  The  great  aim  and  the  chief  pride  of  the  American  Farmer  will  be  to  collect  informa¬ 
tion  from  every  source,  on  every  branch  of  husbandry,  thus  to  enable  the  reader  to 
study  the  various  systems  which  experience  has  proved  to  be  the  best,  under  given 
circumstances.” 

In  1834,  after  a  period  of  15  years,  the  American  Farmer  was  discontinued. 
During  this  period,  several  other  agricultural  papers  had  been  established. 
A  notable  one  was  the  Cultivator,  established  in  1834  at  Albany  by  Jesse  Buel, 
under  the  patronage  of  the  New  York  Agricultural  Society.2  The  Plough  Boy 
(Albany,  1819),  The  New  England  Farmer  (Boston,  1822),  The  Genessee 
Farmer  (Rochester,  1831),  The  Farmer's  Cabinet  (Philadelphia,  1836), 
The  Western  Farmer  (Cincinnati,  1839),  had  all  been  established  in  the  North 
before  1840,  but  some  of  them  had  only  a  brief  existence.  Upon  the  death 
of  Jesse  Buel  in  1839,  The  Cultivator  was  purchased  by  Luther  Tucker,  who 
united  it  with  the  Genessee  Farmer.  In  1853  Tucker  established  The  Country 
Gentleman  as  a  weekly,  continuing  The  Cultivator  as  a  monthly  until  its 
merger  with  The  Country  Gentleman  in  1853.  During  the  decade  1840  to 
1850,  several  other  papers  were  established,  The  Prairie  Farmer,  which  was 
started  at  Chicago  in  1840,  being  especially  worthy  of  mention.  A  number 
of  agricultural  papers  were  established  in  1850,  and  from  that  time  on  the 
development  of  agricultural  journalism  was  rapid.  By  i860  at  least  40  papers 
and  magazines  devoted  almost  exclusively  to  agriculture  were  published  in 
the  country.  How  widely  these  papers  were  circulated  and  read  it  would  be 
difficult  to  determine.  It  was  reported  from  Oberlin,  Ohio,  in  1849,  that  121 
copies  of  agricultural  and  horticultural  papers  were  taken  at  that  post-office.3 

Besides  the  periodicals,  an  increasing  number  of  books  treating  of  agricul¬ 
ture  appeared  during  this  period.  Some  of  these,  like  Ellsworth’s  Valley  of 
the  Upper  Wabash  (1837),  and  the  various  guides  to  the  West,  purposed 
to  set  forth  the  prospects  and  conditions  of  that  region.  Others,  like  Buel’s 
Farmer's  Companion  (1839),  dwelt  upon  the  advantages  of  the  “  New  System 
of  Agriculture.”  It  is  interesting  to  note  that  up  to  about  1850  many  of  the 
volumes  treating  of  agriculture  were  largely  reprints  of  English  works,  with 
the  addition,  perhaps,  of  a  few  pages  relating  to  maize  and  to  machinery. 
It  is  significant  that  the  first  two  pages  of  the  first  issue  of  the  American 
Farmer  are  taken  up  with  a  discussion  of  the  culture  of  the  rutabaga,  or 

1  American  Farmer,  I  (1819),  p.  5. 

2  N.  Y.  State  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions  (1841),  p.  8. 

3  Ohio  State  Board  of  Agriculture,  4th  Annual  Report  (1849),  p.  150. 

316 


DIFFUSION  OF  INFORMATION  317 

Swedish  turnip.4 *  With  the  agricultural  prosperity  of  the  fifties  an  increasing 
number  of  volumes  relating  to  agriculture  were  published  in  America. 

FEDERAL  AID  TO  AGRICULTURE. 

The  National  Government  began  to  assist  in  the  diffusion  of  agricultural 
information  during  this  period.  In  1839  Congress  appropriated  $1,000  for  the 
“  collection  of  agricultural  statistics,  investigations  for  promoting  agriculture 
and  rural  economy,  and  the  procurement  of  cuttings  and  seeds  for  gratuitous 
distribution  among  the  farmers,  which  appropriations  were  expended  under  the 
direction  of  the  Patent  Office,  the  idea  having  originated  with  Hon.  Henry  L. 
Ellsworth.”  6 *  Mr.  Ellsworth  was  Commissioner  of  Patents.  His  interest  in 
agriculture  serves  to  explain  why  the  Federal  agricultural  reports  were  long 
issued  from  the  Patent  Office.  In  1851  the  annual  appropriation  was  increased 
to  $5,500,  in  1854  to  $35,000,  and  in  1856,  $105,000  was  reached.  The  first 
agricultural  report  printed  in  1839  by  the  Patent  Office  contained  54  pages; 
by  1845  ^  bad  reached  the  size  of  1,376  pages,  the  largest  report  issued  during 
this  period.  In  1855,  267,920  volumes  of  the  report  were  issued.6  It  is  of 
interest,  as  a  sign  of  the  times,  that  while  the  early  reports  had  been  largely 
concerned  with  discussions  of  agricultural  practice,  later  reports  had  become 
interested  in  such  subjects  as  the  Practicability  of  Tea  Culture  in  the  United 
States ,  Proposed  Introduction  of  the  Yak  Ox  from  Tartary  to  the  Great 
Plains  of  the  West,  The  Production  of  the  Ionian  Islands  and  Italy.1  The 
first  federal  census  of  agriculture  was  taken  in  1840.  It  was  not  until  1862 
that  the  national  Department  of  Agriculture  was  formed. 

AGRICULTURAL  SOCIETIES. 

The  history  and  services  of  the  early  agricultural  societies  have  been  dis¬ 
cussed  in  a  preceding  chapter  of  this  work  (chap.  XIV,  p.  184  et  seq.). 
Many  of  them  had  become  inactive  or  had  passed  out  of  existence  before  1840. 
A  new  period  began  with  the  reorganization  of  the  New  York  State  Agricul¬ 
tural  Society  in  1841.  The  formation  of  county  agricultural  societies  and  fairs 
in  that  State  was  fostered  through  an  appropriation  by  the  State  Legislature 
of  $40,000.  By  the  end  of  the  year  societies  had  been  founded  in  32  New 
York  counties,  and  in  1842,  42  counties  had  societies,  35  of  which  held  fairs  for 
the  exhibition  of  farm  products,  implements,  and  livestock.8 

From  1840  to  1846  the  formation  of  agricultural  societies  was  a  slow  and 
discouraging  task,  but  with  the  return  of  better  prices  in  1847  a  renewed  inter¬ 
est  was  taken  in  them.  In  Ohio,  although  the  Hamilton  County  Agricultural 
Society  had  been  organized  before  1828,  little  progress  was  made  until  State 
aid  was  extended  in  1846.  The  first  year  thereafter  societies  were  organized  in 
20  or  more  counties,9  and  in  1849  they  were  to  be  found  in  more  than  50 
counties.10  The  Illinois  State  Agricultural  Society  was  established  in  1853, 

4  American  Fanner,  I  (1819),  p.  5. 

8  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  (1857),  Agriculture,  24. 

6  Ibid.,  p.  25. 

1  Ibid.,  166;  1858,  p.  239;  1859,  p.  100. 

8  N.  Y.  State  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions,  II  (1842),  p.  294. 

9  Ohio  State  Board  of  Agriculture,  1st  Annual  Report  (1846),  p.  21. 

10  Ibid.,  4th  Annual  Report  (1849),  P-  5- 


318 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


and  33  county  agricultural  societies  were  organized  the  same  year.11  Between 
the  date  of  the  reorganization  of  the  New  York  Society  in  1841  and  1857*  State 
agricultural  societies  and  boards  of  agriculture  were  formed  in  24  other 
States,  all  but  6  of  which  were  in  the  North.  In  1858  a  list  was  compiled  of 
912  “boards  and  societies”  existing  in  the  United  States,  connected  wholly 
or  in  part  with  agriculture.  Only  137  of  these  were  in  the  South.  New  York 
led  the  states  with  97  societies,  Illinois  had  94,  Indiana  77,  Ohio  and  Iowa 
each  74. 12 

The  agricultural  fair  was  a  leading  feature  in  the  efforts  of  many  of  the 
active  societies,  both  state  and  national.  At  the  fairs,  livestock  shows  and 
implement  trials  were  leading  attractions  and  sources  of  much  benefit.  At  this 
time,  when  so  many  changes  were  occurring,  when  the  farm  organization  was 
changing  from  a  self-sufficing  to  a  commercial  basis,  and  when  new  territory, 
markets,  and  methods  were  rapidly  developing  and  succeeding  one  another, 
the  agricultural  societies,  fairs,  and  periodicals  were  important  factors  in 
agricultural  development.  They  provided  a  stimulus  to  the  cause  and  assisted 
in  the  introduction  and  spread  of  improved  methods,  implements,  and  live¬ 
stock.  In  addition  to  these  means  of  diffusing  information,  other  influences 
were  at  work.  Local  differences  and  customs  of  long  standing  were  rapidly 
breaking  down.  Orange  County  butter-makers  and  Herkimer  County  cheese- 
makers  were  to  be  found  in  western  New  York,  in  Ohio,  and  in  Wisconsin;  ( 
Vermont  wool-growers  were  emigrating  to  Ohio  and  Illinois.  The  rapidly- 
improving  means  of  transportation  and  communication  and  the  development  of 
commercial  agriculture  were  opposed  to  particularistic  methods. 

* 

AGRICULTURAL  LEADERSHIP— JOHN  JOHNSON. 

The  period  of  agricultural  colleges  and  experiment  stations  had  not  yet 
dawned.  As  stated  by  the  editor  of  the  American  Farmer  in  his  first  issue 
(1819),  information  was  to  be  obtained  by  a  study  of  the  various  systems 
which  experience  had  proved  to  be  the  best.1"  The  name  of  John  Johnson 
should  be  mentioned  here.  An  enterprising  Scotchman,  he  came  to  America 
in  1821  and  settled  on  a  farm  near  Geneva,  New  York.14  In  1835  he  imported 
from  Scotland  a  pattern  of  drain-tile  and  began  the  drainage  of  his  farm. 

The  labor  and  cost,  however,  were  too  great  to  warrant  extensive  use  of  tile. 

But  in  1848  John  Delafield,  a  neighbor  of  Johnson,  who  had  observed  the 
good  results  of  drainage,  imported  a  machine  for  making  tile,  which  greatly 
reduced  the  price.  By  1855  Johnson  had  laid  about  47  miles  of  tile.  In 
describing  his  early  experience  with  tile  drainage  Johnson  wrote : 16 

“I  commenced  under  unfavorable  circumstances  in  different  ways.  First  for  want 
of  funds;  next,  the  tile  cost  double  what  they  do  now,  and  digging  double;  and  last 
though  not  least,  public  opinion  was  very  much  against  me.  Some  would  ask  me  if 

I  was  going  to  put  crockery  over  all  my  farm.  Some  would  tell  me  they  thought  my 

farm  was  rather  too  dry  if  anything;  and  some  of  my  own  countrymen  would  give  me 
the  hint  that  they  had  known  some  men  drain  and  otherwise  improve  their  lands  so 
that  they  lost  them .  Notwithstanding  all  this,  I  still  felt  confident  that  my  drain- 

II  Ill.  State  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions ,  III  (1853),  pp.  1,  3. 

12  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  (1858),  Agriculture,  91. 

13  American  Farmer,  I  (1819)  ,  5. 

14  Bailey,  Cyclopedia  of  American  Agriculture,  I,  403. 

15  N.  Y.  State  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions,  XV  (1855),  p.  258. 


DIFFUSION  OF  INFORMATION 


319 


ing  would  end  well  if  I  lived,  as  the  excess  of  two  years’  crops  after  draining  would 
pay  the  cost,  and  I  persevered,  and  the  more  I  drained  the  more  I  was  convinced  I  was 
right,  and  I  have  not  been  disappointed  at  the  result,  as  my  fondest  anticipations  have 
been  realized.” 

Johnson  traveled  over  the  State,  wrote  articles  for  the  journals  and  agri¬ 
cultural  reports,  and  was  visited  at  his  farm  by  a  large  number  who  came 
to  observe  the  results  of  drainage  and  soil  improvement.  In  1859  he  was 
presented  with  a  service  of  plate  in  recognition  of  his  service  to  the  agriculture 
of  New  York  by  a  group  of  prominent  New  York  citizens.  Such  was  mainly 
the  method  of  discovering  new  things  in  agriculture  from  1840  to  i860.  As 
Jesse  Buel  may  serve  to  typify  the  movement  for  agricultural  improvement  in 
the  East  from  1820  to  1840,  so  John  Johnson  may  serve  as  a  representative 
of  the  continuation  of  the  movement  from  1840  to  i860. 

SCIENCE  AND  AGRICULTURE— AGRICULTURAL  CHEMISTRY. 

Rapid  advance  was  being  made  in  the  sciences  pertaining  to  agriculture, 
especially  in  chemistry.  Philosophers  had  speculated  for  ages  regarding  soil 
fertility  and  as  to  what  constitutes  the  food  of  plants,  but  not  until  the  begin¬ 
ning  of  the  nineteenth  century  was  the  attention  of  chemists  turned  to  the  sub¬ 
ject.  In  1804  De  Saussure  published  his  Recherches  Chemiques  sur  le  Vegeta¬ 
tion.  Davy’s  lectures  on  agricultural  chemistry  (1803)  did  much  to  extend  the 
existing  knowledge  of  the  relation  of  chemistry  to  agricultural  practice.  The 
investigations  of  Bousingault  began  to  develop  about  1834.  Three  years  later 
Sir  James  Lawes  began  the  experiments  upon  his  estate  at  Rothamsted,  Eng¬ 
land,  which  have  meant  so  much  to  agricultural  knowledge  and  progress.  It 
was,  however,  the  appearance  in  1841  of  the  American  edition  of  Liebig’s 
work,  Chemistry  in  Its  Application  to  Agriculture  and  Physiology,  in  which 
he  traced  the  relation  between  the  nutrition  of  plants  and  the  composition  of 
the  soil,  which  attracted  widespread  interest  to  the  subject  in  the  United  States. 
Now  began  a  true  understanding  of  the  fundamental  principles  of  manuring, 
following  a  long  period  of  more  or  less  general  speculation  on  the  subject. 

LIEBIG’S  MINERAL  THEORY. 

Liebig’s  mineral  theory  and  its  application  to  soil  fertility  at  once  became 
a  popular  theme  of  discussion  in  the  agricultural  publications  and  on  the  public 
platforms  of  the  East.  High  hopes  were  entertained  of  the  benefits  to  be 
derived  from  “  chemical  agriculture.”  16  It  is  said  that  “  a  little  learning  is  a 
dangerous  thing,”  and  so  it  proved  in  this  case.  With  the  limited  knowledge 
then  possessed,  too  great  confidence  was  placed  in  the  practical  value  of  soil 
analysis  and  in  mineral  manures.  When  it  was  found  that  certain  mineral 
elements  were  required  for  the  growth  of  plants  and  that  these  were  furnished 
by  the  soil,  it  was  proposed  to  analyze  the  soil  and  the  plant,  and  from  their 
chemical  compositions  to  form  the  basis  of  treatment.  If  the  soil  lacked 
any  necessary  constituent,  it  could  be  supplied  by  mineral  manures.  When  in¬ 
terest  had  once  been  aroused  by  the  work  of  Liebig  and  other  scientists,  per¬ 
sons  of  less  note  carried  on  the  agitation  for  “  this  new  and  greater  application 
of  chemistry  to  agriculture.”  Papers  teemed  with  advertisements  of  “  chem- 


16  Buel,  Farmer's  Companion  (ed.  1839),  71- 


320 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


ists  ”  and  “  professors  ”  who  for  the  moderate  sum  of  $5  or  $10  would  ana¬ 
lyze  the  soil  and  advise  as  to  its  treatment. 

Increasing  attention  was  devoted  to  the  making  and  applying  of  compost 
manures.  To  encourage  their  use,  premiums  were  awarded  by  the  agricul¬ 
tural  societies  for  the  best  prepared  compost.  Muck,  straw,  lime,  seaweed,  and 
hog  manure  were  favored  constituents,  the  relative  merits  of  which  were  dis¬ 
cussed  and  rediscussed.  The  first  premium  on  compost  at  the  Maine  State 
Society  Fair,  in  i860,  was  awarded  to  a  lot  “  made  of  60  loads  swamp  muck, 
10  loads  of  thatch  hay,  10  cords  rock- weed,  to  which  were  added  30  large 
sturgeons  and  5  hogsheads  of  fishbrine,  and  the  droppings  of  20  head  of 
cattle.”  Another  parcel  consisted  of  “  7  cords  of  muck,  10  of  rock-weed  and 
5  from  the  pig  sty.”  17  Guano  and  artificial  fertilizers  made  according  to  formu¬ 
lae  based  on  the  chemical  composition  of  plants  began  to  come  into  use  in 
the  Atlantic  States.  The  use  of  nitrates  and  of  superphosphate  of  lime  became 
common. 

THE  INTEREST  IN  AGRICULTURAL  EDUCATION— MICHIGAN 

AGRICULTURAL  COLLEGE. 

But  more  than  all  else,  these  new  discoveries  helped  to  awaken  a  sense  of 
the  relation  of  sciences  to  agricultural  practice  and  to  stimulate  a  desire  for 
information  and  education.  No  names  appear  more  frequently  in  the  agricul¬ 
tural  literature  of  the  years  succeeding  1840  than  those  of  Liebig,  Davy,  and 
Johnson.  Few  were  the  speeches  in  favor  of  agricultural  education,  which 
did  not  mention  these  early  investigators.  It  was  in  such  an  atmosphere  that 
the  Michigan  Agricultural  College,  the  first  institution  of  its  kind  in  the 
country,  received  its  first  class  of  students  in  May  1857*  Thus  a  new  phase 
in  agricultural  education  was  begun. 

The  spirit  in  which  these  new  discoveries  were  received,  typical  of  the 
optimistic  attitude  of  the  period,  is  well  illustrated  by  the  following  extract 
from  President  James  Wadsworth’s  address  before  the  New  York  Agricul¬ 
tural  Society  in  1842 : 18 

“  The  application  of  science,  the  most  profound  which  has  yet  been  attained  by  the 
far-reaching  efforts  of  the  human  mind,  to  all  the  products  of  our  industry,  to  the  soil, 
the  crop,  the  animal,  has  been  reserved  for  the  age  in  which  we  live.  It  is  not  claiming 
too  much  to  say  that  more  progress  has  been  made  in  this  direction  within  the  last 

twenty  years  than  in  any  previous  century .  From  the  origin  of  our  race  almost 

to  the  present  time,  the  path  of  the  husbandman  has  been  clouded  in  darkness  and 
doubt.  From  the  sowing  of  the  seed  to  the  gathering  of  the  harvest,  mystery  attended 

every  step .  The  precepts  of  tradition,  the  results  of  a  multitude  of  experiments, 

were  founded  mostly  in  wisdom ;  .  .  .  .  Not  so  now.  The  scientific  analysis  of  soils, 
of  manures,  and  of  vegetable  products,  explains  not  only  the  workings  of  nature  and 
the  practices  of  art,  but  opens  an  inexhaustible  field  of  new  combinations  and  novel 
results.” 

Much  of  the  discussion  which  had  previously  centered  around  the  business 
aspects  of  farming  was  now  shifted  to  other  subjects.  In  the  East,  chemical 
agriculture  was  the  center  of  discussion;  in  the  West,  the  development  of 
machinery  and  other  means  with  which  to  exploit  the  soil  were  attracting 
attention.  Science  at  last  began  to  supplement  wisdom  and  speculation. 

17  Maine  Bd.  of  Agric.,  5th  Annual  Report  (i860),  Abstract  of  Returns  from  Agric. 

Societies,  56. 

is  N.  Y.  State  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions,  II  (1842),  p.  50. 


Chapter  XXVI. — Wheat. 

THE  DECADE  FROM  1840  TO  1850. 

In  1839  four  States  produced  61.5  per  cent  of  the  total  wheat  crop  of  the 
country.  In  the  order  of  their  importance  these  States  were  Ohio,  19.5 
per  cent,  Pennsylvania,  15*6  per  cent,  New  York  14.5  per  cent,  and  Virginia 
1 1.9  per  cent.  The  Southern  States  were  producing  12  per  cent  of  the  total 
wheat  crop,  the  border  States  24  per  cent,  and  the  Northern  States  64  per 
cent.  In  Ohio  the  wheat  was  largely  produced  in  a  strip  of  country  comprising 
about  half  of  the  State  and  extending  from  the  east  central  to  the  southwest- 


Fig.  71. — Wheat,  1839.  Each  dot  represents  100,000  bushels. 

Western  New  York,  eastern  Ohio,  the  vicinity  of  Cincinnati,  and  the  limestone 
valleys  of  Pennsylvania  and  Maryland  were  the  prominent  wheat  growing  regions 
in  1839.  Ohio  produced  more  wheat  than  any  other  state.  West  of  Ohio  there  was 
no  distinctive  wheat  growing  region. 

ern  part  of  the  State.  (See  fig.  71.)  Western  Pennsylvania  was  a  part  of  the 
same  wheat  region.  Wheat  was  an  important  crop  in  the  limestone  regions  of 
southeastern  Pennsylvania  and  of  the  valleys  of  Maryland  and  Virginia.  The 
wheat  area  of  New  York  was  largely  in  the  northwestern  part  of  the  State. 
Eastern  New  York  and  the  New  England  States  raised  very  little  wheat.  In 
the  West,  wheat-raising  had  but  just  begun  in  the  Lake  Michigan  region. 

In  1849  the  four  States  mentioned  above  still  led  in  the  production  of  wheat. 
(See  fig.  72.)  Southern  Michigan  and  Wisconsin,  northern  and  west-central 
Illinois  were  the  regions  of  greatest  increase.  Production  load  extended  west- 


22 


321 


322  AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 

ward  along  the  Missouri  River  and  into  southeastern  Iowa.  There  was  but  a 
slight  increase  in  total  production.  In  the  East  the  changes  in  wheat-growing 
during  the  decade  of  the  forties  were  largely  changes  in  methods,  shortening 
of  the  period  of  summer  fallow  and  increased  care  in  culture.  In  the  West, 
along  with  the  expansion  of  the  wheat  area,  poor  crops  and  low  prices  during 
the  years  1847  to  1853  were  leading  to  general  dissatisfaction  with  the  wheat 
crop,  to  increased  sowing  of  spring  wheat,  and  to  diversified  farming. 


During  the  forties  a  wheat  growing  region  began  to  develop  on  the  borders  of 
Lake  Michigan.  Southern  Michigan,  southern  Wisconsin,  northern  Illinois  and 
Indiana  greatly  extended  their  wheat  area.  In  New  England  the  production  of 
wheat  was  declining. 

WHEAT  IN  NEW  ENGLAND. 

By  1840,  wheat  was  no  longer  considered  a  staple  crop  in  New  England 
agriculture.  In  southern  New  England  it  was  grown  chiefly  for  home  use 
and  was  raised  in  small  patches  of  2  or  3  acres,  in  rotation  with  other  crops. 
A  common  rotation  was  oats,  corn  or  potatoes,  wheat,  and  grass.  Wheat  sown 
on  sod-land  after  one  plowing  with  an  application  of  lime  was  considered  one 
of  the  best  systems.1  Liberal  amounts  of  lime,  ashes,  and  manure  were  usually 
applied  to  the  land  before  the  crop  was  sown.  In  Maine,  newly  burned-over 
land  was  considered  the  best  for  wheat.  In  northern  New  England,  spring 
wheat  had  been  rather  generally  substituted  for  winter  wheat.  Methods 
of  seeding  were  the  same  as  in  eastern  New  York.  As  a  preventive  of  smut, 
wheat  seed  was  soaked  in  brine  and  rolled  in  lime  before  seeding.  As  a 
preventive  of  the  wheat  midge,  many  farmers  gave  the  standing  grain  just  as 
it  was  coming  into  flower  a  thorough  coating  of  newly-slaked  lime,  the  appli¬ 
cation  being  made  while  the  grain  was  wet  with  dew  or  rain. 


1  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report,  1852,  Agriculture,  n 7,  120,  130. 


WHEAT 


323 


Table  38. — Wheat:  Production  in  the  United  States. 

[Source:  U.  S.  Census,  1840,  1850,  and  i860.] 


Geographic  division  and 
State. 


1840. 

1850. 

Total 

1,000 

bu. 

Per 

capita 

bu. 

Per 

cent 

u.  s. 

total. 

Total 

1,000 

bu. 

Per 

capita 

bu. 

Per 

cent 

U.  S. 
total. 

United  States  . 

Geographic  Division : 
New  England 
Middle  Atlantic  . . 
East  North  Central 
W.  North  Central. 

Mountain  . 

Pacific  . 

New  England : 

Maine  . 

New  Hampshire  . . 

Vermont  . 

Massachusetts  .... 

Rhode  Island  . 

Connecticut  . 

Middle  Atlantic : 

New  York  . 

New  Jersey  . 

Pennsylvania  . 

East  North  Central : 

Ohio  . 

Indiana  . 

Illinois  . 

Michigan  . 

Wisconsin  . 

Vest  North  Central : 

Minnesota  . 

Iowa  . 

Missouri  . 

Dak.  Territory  ... 

Nebraska  . 

Kansas  . 

Mountain : 

New  Mexico  . 

Utah  . 

Nevada  . 

Pacific : 

Washington  . 

Oregon  . 

California  . 


84,823 

2,014 

26,274 

26,326 

1,192 


5-0 


848 

422 

496 

158 

3 

87 

12,287 

774 

13,213 

16,572 
4,040 
3  336 
2,157 
212 


155 

i,037 


5 

2 

7 

10 

5 
7 

10 

6 


100.0 


2 

3i 

3i 


14 

15 

19 

4 

3 

2 


100  486 

1,091 

30,090 

39,328 

4,514 

304 

229 

296 

186 

536 

3i 

a 

42 

13,121 

1,601 

15,368 

14,487 

6,214 

9,415 

4,926 

4,286 

1 

i,53i 

2,982 


196 

108 


212 

17 


4- 3 

0.4 

5- i 

8.7 
5-i 

4.2 

2.2 

•5 

.6 

1.7 


4.2 

3-3 

6.6 

7-3 

6.3 
11. 1 
12.4 
14.0 

.2 

8.0 

4.4 


3-2 

9-5 


15.9 

.2 


100.0 


I 

29 

39 


13 
1 

15 

14 
6 
9 
4 
4 


Total 

1,000 

bu. 


173,105 

1,083 

23,486 

79,798 

15,207 

823 

6,841 

234 

239 

437 

120 

1 

52 

8681 

1,763 

13,042 

I5,H9 

16,848 

23,837 

8,336 

15,658 

2,187 

8,449 
4  228 
1 

148 

194 

434 

385 

4 

86 

827 

5,928 


i860. 


Per 

capita 

bu. 


5-5 

0.3 

3- 1 

11. 5 
7.0 

4- 7 
15.4 

•4 

•7 

1.4 


.  1 

2.2 

2.6 

4- 5 

6- 5 
12.5 

13.9 

11. 1 

20.2 

12.7 

12.5 

3- 6 
.2 

5- i 
1.8 

4- 6 

9.6 
•  5 

7- 4 
15-8 
15-6 


Per 
cent 
U.  S 
total. 


100.0 

0.6 

13.6 

46.1 

8.8 

•  5 
4.0 

.1 
.  1 

3 
.  1 


5-0 

1.0 

7-6 

8.7 

9-7 

13-8 

4-8 

9.1 

1.3 
4.9 

2.4 

.  1 
.  1 

•3 

.2 


.  1 
•  5 
3.4 


*  Less  than  500  bushels. 


324 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


STATE  BOUNTIES. 

Several  attempts  had  been  made  in  New  England  during  the  thirties  to  en¬ 
courage  wheat  production.  The  Maine  Legislature  at  the  session  of  i837> 
passed  an  act  allowing  $2  bounty  for  the  first  20  bushels  of  wheat  raised  by 
any  one  farmer,  and  6  cents  for  every  bushel  over  that  amount,  the  object 
being  to  encourage  the  culture  of  wheat.  A  considerable  sum  of  money  was 
paid  out  to  farmers  under  this  act.2  In  1838,  the  State  of  Massachusetts  like¬ 
wise  offered  a  bounty  upon  wheat  grown  within  the  State.  The  object  of  the 
law  was  said  to  be  two-fold :  First,  to  ascertain  the  capacity  of  the  State  to 
produce  wheat ;  second,  to  learn  the  common  modes  of  cultivating  it,  in  order 
if  possible  thence  to  determine  the  best  mode.  It  appeared  from  the  records 
of  3,600  claimants  under  the  Massachusetts  law,  which  were  examined  in 
1839,  that  the  crop  suffered  considerably  from  drought  and  severely  from 
the  grain  insect  or  wheat  fly,  and  that  there  were  many  instances  of  smut. 
It  appeared  also  from  the  returns  that  in  scarcely  any  instance  did  the  use 
of  lime  or  plaster  give  any  decided  result.  The  average  yield  was  set  at 
about  15  bushels.3 

CAUSES  OF  DECLINE  OF  WHEAT-GROWING  IN 

NEW  ENGLAND. 

Several  reasons  were  given  for  the  decrease  in  wheat  acreage,  chief  among 
which  were  competition  of  the  West,  soil  exhaustion,  and  the  repeated  attacks 
of  the  wheat  midge,  rust,  and  Hessian  fly.  Vermont  reported  a  large  decline 
on  her  clay  soil  caused  by  the  ravages  of  the  midge  and  declining  soil  fertility.4 
Massachusetts,  Connecticut,  and  Rhode  Island  attributed  their  rapid  falling 
off  in  large  part  to  the  “  less  and  less  inducement  to  cultivate  wheat  there, 
owing  to  the  immense  crops  of  the  West.”  5  The  development  of  dairying  and 
sheep  farming  also  led  many  farmers  to  give  up  the  cultivation  of  grain,  and 
it  appears,  indeed,  that  the  New  England  farmer  was  glad  to  abandon  wheat¬ 
growing  when  the  western  supply  became  available. 

The  cultivation  of  wheat  in  New  England  continued  to  decline  during  the 
forties.  In  the  three  southern  States  the  crop  was  nearly  abandoned ;  in  the 
three  northern  States  its  acreage  was  rapidly  decreasing.  From  Maine,  in  1848, 
came  the  report : 

“  Twenty  years  since,  our  land  produced  a  fine  crop  of  spring  wheat  with  as  much 
certainty  as  we  looked  for  a  crop  of  hay.  But  this  has  sadly  changed.  Numerous  enemies 
have  sprung  up,  amongst  which,  mildew,  and  rust,  and  the  weevil  are  the  greatest,  till 
the  raising  of  a  field  of  wheat  is  viewed  as  an  experiment.  A  majority  of  our  farmers 
have  abandoned  the  trial  entirely .”  6 

A  writer  from  Richmond,  Massachusetts,  in  1852  thus  expresses  the  New 
England  sentiment : 7 

“Less  and  less  of  it  [wheat]  is  sown  each  year.  When  oats  are  worth  fifty  cents  a 
bushel,  and  corn  seventy-five  cents,  and  superfine  flour  can  be  bought  for  five  and  six 

2  Maine  Board  of  Agriculture,  5th  Annual  Report  (i860),  p.  178/  See  also  above,  p.  193. 

3  3d  Report ,  Agriculture  of  Massachusetts  (1840),  pp.  16,  48,  50,  51. 

^  Cultivator,  VIII  (1841),  p.  146. 

5  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report,  1843,  p.  19. 

6  Ibid.,  (1848),  p.  342. 


WHEAT  325 

dollars  a  barrel,  a  general  opinion  prevails  that  it  is  cheaper  to  raise  the  former  and  buy 
the  latter  than  to  run  the  risk  of  an  uncertain  wheat  crop.” 

WHEAT  AND  THE  CROPPING  SYSTEM  IN  NEW  YORK. 

A  large  share  of  the  total  wheat  crop  of  New  York  in  1839  was  grown  in 
the  western  section  of  the  State  in  the  Genessee  Valley.  (See  fig.  71,  p.  321.) 
Here  wheat  was  the  staple  product,  and  wheat  sown  on  a  summer  fallow 
was  the  common  method  of  production.  The  prevailing  cropping  systems 
were:  (1)  to  sow  wheat  on  alternate  years  after  peas,  or  (2)  after  a  clover 
crop  which  had  been  sown  amidst  the  wheat  the  previous  spring,  or  (3)  to 
sow  wheat  on  a  pasture  sod. 

Fallowing,  as  practiced  by  the  New  York  farmer  of  this  period,  was  of 
many  degrees  of  thoroughness,  varying  from  a  constant  stirring  of  the  soil 
with  consequent  absence  of  crops  for  an  entire  year,  to  merely  plowing  the 
land  and  leaving  it  idle  during  July  and  August.* 8  The  earlier  practice,  a  naked 
fallow  lasting  from  April  to  seeding  time,  had  been  largely  abandoned.  It  was 
usual  in  1840  to  begin  the  fallow  by  plowing  under  a  crop  of  clover,  peas,  or  a 
pasture  sod  the  last  of  June,  then  to  plow  again  after  haying  in  August,  when 
the  sod  was  fairly  dead  and  partially  decomposed,  and  a  third  time  about 
the  first  of  September,  when  the  seed  was  sown  and  harrowed  in.  In  addition, 
a  harrowing  between  each  plowing  and  two  harrowings  after  seeding  were 
often  given.  Stable  manure  was  often  applied  to  the  sod  before  plowing,  or  at 
the  time  of  the  last  plowing,  together  with  from  to  2  bushels  of  gypsum  per 
acre.  Many  of  the  best  farmers  preferred  to  have  the  clover  grazed  off  in  the 
spring  before  plowing  and  were  increasing  their  flocks  of  sheep  for  that 
purpose. 

A  JUSTIFICATION  OF  SUMMER  FALLOWS. 

A  New  York  farmer  in  1843  thus  attempted  9  to  justify  the  practice  of  sum¬ 
mer  fallowing  which  prevailed  in  the  western  half  of  the  State : 

“  In  large  parts  of  our  country  where  wheat  is  grown,  summer  fallowing,  or  the 
previous  preparation  of  that  crop  by  plowing,  harrowing,  etc.,  is  indispensible  to  the 
success  of  a  crop ;  and  as  cultivation  is  extended  and  continued,  the  practice  must  more 
widely  prevail.  The  necessity.  ...  of  the  course  is  for  cleaning  the  soil ;  as  owing 
to  imperfect  farming,  and  careless  culture,  most  farms  are  so  overrun  with  weeds,  that 
unless  some  thorough  measures  are  taken  for  their  destruction,  the  crop  of  grain  appears 

to  be  considered  by  them  as  an  intruder .  Now  and  then,  indeed,  an  individual 

who  manages  better  than  his  neighbors;  who  has  guarded  against  the  introduction  and 
spread  of  weeds,  or  by  skillful  culture  has  eradicated  them;  who  by  a  proper  rotation 
and  manuring,  has  made  his  whole  farm  capable  of  the  production  of  any  crop ;  and 
who  by  draining  or  deep  plowing  has  given  a  fineness,  dryness,  and  depth,  that  renders 
summer  fallowing  unnecessary,  dispenses  with  this  laborious  process,  and  putting  in 
his  wheat  after  corn,  peas,  or  roots,  gives  these  the  first  benefit  of  his  manures,  and  finds 

the  crop  produced  in  the  place  of  a  fallow,  a  clear  gain .  At  present  it  must  be 

conceded  that  in  general  summer  fallows  are  necessary,  and  that  unless  every  part  of  the 
farm  submitted  to  cropping  is  occasionally  fallowed,  it  will  soon  become  so  foul  as  to 
be  unfit  for  the  production  of  grain.” 

While  the  growing  of  corn  and  root  crops  in  rotation  was  increasing,  the 
difficulty  of  removing  the  corn  or  the  roots  from  the  land  in  season  to  sow 


8  Cultivator,  new  series,  II  (1845),  p.  20. 

8  Cultivator,  X  (1843),  p.  122. 


326  AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 

the  wheat  was  a  common  objection.  One  writer  of  the  time,10  aftei  discussing 
the  merits  of  rotation  and  the  good  effects  upon  the  wheat  crop  of  applying 
manure  to  the  preceding  corn  crop,  concludes  with  the  statement : 

“  It  is  unhappily  too  true,  that  on  a  large  portion  of  our  best  cultivated  wheat  lands, 
the  soil  has  become  so  infested  with  a  variety  of  foul  and  noxious  plants  [Canada 
thistles,  oxeye  daisies,  white  daisies,  johnsworth]  that  a  course  of  naked  summer 
fallow,  thoroughly  performed,  has  become  necessary  to  counteract  them,  and  prevent 

their  increase  and  spread .  The  only  alternative  of  such  fallows  is  hoed  crops, 

and  these  must  of  necessity.  ...  be  too  limited  to  seriously  affect  the  propriety  of 
fallows  on  weedy  land.” 

Barn-yard  manure  was  frequently  spread  on  the  furrow  and  harrowed  in 
with  the  seed  wheat ;  ashes  and  lime  were  used  in  large  amounts,  but  clover 
and  plaster  were  mainly  relied  upon  to  keep  up  fertility.  Subsoiling  was 
being  tried  by  a  few  who  reported  results  of  one-third  more  wheat  per  acre. 
Summer  fallowing,  however,  was  still  the  common  practice  in  western  New 
York.  A  Monroe  County  farmer  writes  in  1845:*  11 

“  Of  the  one  hundred  and  eighty-four  acres,  I  calculate  to  have  one-third  or  one- 
fourth  of  it  annually  in  wheat,  according  to  the  condition  of  the  soil  to  produce  a  bounti¬ 
ful  crop,  two-fifths  of  which  is  sown  after  summer  crops,  barley,  oats,  or  peas,  but 
generally  barley.  The  remaining  three-fifths  of  it  [is]  sown  on  summer  fallow,  viz : 
forty-five  or  fifty-five  acres  in  wheat,  ten  or  fifteen  for  hoe  crop,  the  same  in  barley 
and  oats,  forty  in  pasture,  forty  for  hay  and  clover  seed,  and  thirty  for  fallow.” 

In  the  six  largest  wheat-growing  counties  of  western  New  York,  in  1854, 
over  17  per  cent  of  the  improved  land  was  reported  to  be  in  fallow,  being 
nearly  equivalent  to  the  area  of  winter  wheat.  In  Rensselaer  and  Albany 
Counties  in  eastern  New  York,  in  the  same  year,  only  1.8  per  cent  of  the 
total  improved  land  was  in  fallow.  In  Onondaga  and  Cortland  Counties,  in 
central  New  York,  the  per  cent  of  fallow  land  was  I.4.12  The  method  of 
working  the  fallow  was  also  changing,  the  cultivator  now  being  extensively 
used  in  place  of  the  plow.13  A  good  team  was  said  to  be  able  to  go  over  10 
or  12  acres  per  day. 

DECLINE  OF  WHEAT  GROWING  IN  HUDSON  AND  MOHAWK 

VALLEYS. 

With  the  development  of  the  wheat  region  of  western  New  York  and  the 
growth  of  livestock  farming  in  the  eastern  part  of  the  State,  wheat-raising 
had  declined  in  the  valleys  of  the  Hudson  and  the  Mohawk.  In  the  Hudson 
Valley  soil  exhaustion  was  apparent.  In  addition,  the  ravages  of  the  wheat 
midge  and  the  Hessian  fly,  beginning  about  1830,  had  become  so  disastrous 
as  to  destroy  in  1835  and  1836  almost  the  entire  crop.  Many  farmers  aban¬ 
doned  further  attempts  to  cultivate  this  grain.14  By  1840,  however,  many  of 
the  farmers  in  this  region  were  venturing  again  to  raise  wheat  on  a  moderate 
scale  with  good  success.15 

™  Ibid.,  VII  (1840),  p.  1 33. 

11  N.  Y.  State  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions,  V  (1845),  P-  t94- 

12  Ibid.,  XVI  (1856),  p.  204. 

13  Cultivator,  new  series,  VI  (1849),  p.  109. 

14  N.  Y.  State  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions  (i860),  pp.  7 50-52. 

15  Cultivator,  VII  (1840),  p.  160. 


WHEAT 


327 


On  the  high  lands  of  the  Mohawk  Valley,  especially  in  Madison,  Onondago, 
and  Cayuga  Counties,  winterkilling  and  the  low  yields  of  winter  wheat  on 
all  lands,  except  the  first  fallowing  of  pasture  lands,  were  leading  to  the 
substitution  of  spring  wheat  for  winter  wheat.  Many  farmers,  finding  dairy¬ 
ing  or  the  raising  of  barley  and  oats  more  certain  and  profitable  than  wheat, 
were  gradually  abandoning  its  culture.  In  this  region  the  summer  fallow  had 
rather  generally  given  way  to  fallow  crops.16  The  U.  S.  Patent  Office  Reports 
for  1843  and  1844  state  that  the  New  York  wheat  crop  had  diminished  very 
sensibly  during  the  past  10  years.17  Much  of  the  decrease  was  undoubtedly 
the  result  of  the  abandonment  of  wheat-growing  in  the  older  counties  of 
eastern  New  York. 

WHEAT  IN  PENNSYLVANIA. 

Pennsylvania  ranked  second  in  the  production  of  wheat  in  1839.  Within  the 
State  there  were  two  wheat-producing  regions — one  in  the  limestone  districts 
in  the  southeastern  part  of  the  State,  the  other  in  the  western  part  of  the 
State  in  the  counties  adjoining  Ohio.  (See  fig.  71.)  During  the  thirties 
the  condition  of  the  wheat  crops  in  eastern  Pennsylvania  had  much  improved. 
Formerly  the  soil  had  been  greatly  exhausted  through  continued  cropping  to 
grain.  During  the  early  thirties  yields  had  been  so  low  and  the  ravages  of  the 
Hessian  fly  so  severe  that  many  farmers  had  almost  despaired  of  further 
cultivation  of  wheat.  But  better  methods  of  tillage,  a  judicious  rotation  of 
crops,  care  and  attention  in  the  collection  and  use  of  manure  and  lime,  together 
with  the  introduction  of  Mediterranean  wheat,  had  later  given  a  new  impetus 
to  the  cultivation  of  grain.18 

In  1840,  wheat  in  this  region  was  commonly  produced  as  one  crop  in  a 
well-established  rotation  of  corn,  oats,  winter  wheat  or  rye,  clover,  pasture. 
The  oat-stubble  was  sometimes  plowed  in  August,  allowed  to  lie  fallow  about 
a  month,  then  plowed  again,  and  seeded ;  or  often  it  was  plowed  only  once 
before  seeding.  Improved  methods  of  culture  and  attention  to  liming  and 
manuring  were  giving  increasing  yields.19  As  much  as  25  to  30  cart-loads  of 
stable  manure  or  400  pounds  of  guano  per  acre  were  frequently  applied  before 
seeding  to  wheat.20  In  central  New  Jersey,  wheat  was  usually  sown  in  a  rota¬ 
tion  of  corn,  potatoes  or  other  truck  crops,  wheat,  clover  and  timothy.21  In 
Maryland  and  Delaware  the  increasing  use  of  marl,  lime,  guano,  and  clover 
was  reported  as  leading  to  an  increase  in  wheat  production.22 

OHIO’S  LEADERSHIP,  1839  AND  1849. 

Ohio  produced  16,500,000  bushels  of  wheat  in  1839  and  14,500,000  in  1849. 
In  1839  the  State  ranked  first  in  bushels  of  wheat  produced  and  in  1849  second, 
Pennsylvania  having  taken  first  place.  After  the  opening  of  the  Erie  Canal, 
Ohio  had  rapidly  developed  as  a  wheat-growing  State.  In  1845  the  flour 

16  N.  Y.  State  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions  (1841),  p.  145. 

17  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report,  1843,  p.  19. 

18  N.  Y.  State  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions,  II  (1842),  p.  105. 

19  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report,  1850,  Agriculture,  156;  ibid.  (1851),  p.  241. 

20  Ibid.,  1850,  p.  156. 

21  Ibid.,  1851,  p.  233. 

22  Ibid.,  1851,  p.  263. 


328 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


exports  of  the  State  were  reported  as  450,000  barrels  from  Cleveland,  joo,ooo 
from  Toledo,  150,000  from  Sandusky,  150,000  from  Cincinnati,  40,000  from 
Marietta,  and  30,000  from  Portsmouth.  The  lake  now  provided  the  chief  out¬ 
let  for  Ohio  wheat.23 

The  wheat  counties  in  the  main  comprised  a  region  of  the  State  located  on 
the  dividing  ridge  that  separated  the  waters  flowing  into  Lake  Erie  from  those 
emptying  into  the  Ohio  River.  Knox,  Licking,  Richland,  Ashland,  Wayne, 
Stark,  Muskingum,  Fairfield,  and  Belmont  were  the  leading  counties.  About 
half  of  this  region  might  be  called  hilly,  while  the  remainder  was  rich  valley 
or  table  land.  The  valley  land  was  said  to  range  in  price  “  from  $30  to  $40 
per  acre ;  the  moderately  hilly  and  undulating  at  from  $20  to  $30 ;  and  the  high 
table  lands  at  from  $15  to  $20  per  acre.”  24  It  was  the  opinion  of  the  earl) 
settlers  that  the  quality  of  any  soil  could  be  ascertained  fairly  well  from  a 
study  of  the  timber  grown  upon  it.  The  high,  rolling  upland,  covered  with 
a  thick  growth  of  oak,  was  considered  the  best  and  most  certain  land  for  wheat. 
For  other  crops,  the  land  originally  covered  with  a  thick  growth  of  sugar 
maple,  elm,  black  walnut,  and  cherry  was  considered  best. 

THE  METHODS  OF  CULTIVATION,  1851. 

The  method  of  wheat  cultivation  is  thus  described  in  the  Cultivator  of 

1851: 25 

“  The  cultivation  of  clover  as  a  preparative  crop  of  wheat,  is  more  generally  prac¬ 
tised  on  the  oak  lands,  such  as  abound  in  Richland,  Ashland,  Wayne,  and  Stark  Counties, 
than  in  any  other  portion  of  Ohio.  In  these  and  a  few  adjoining  counties,  the  system  of 
making  naked  summer  fallows  prevails  very  generally,  and  indeed  but  very  little  wheat 
is  sown  in  any  other  way,  by  those  who  make  it  a  point  to  make  their  wheat  crop  their 
main  dependence.  The  summer  fallow  is  usually  made  on  a  two-year  old  clover  sod.  It 
is  rarely  broken  up  before  the  first  of  July,  and  after  which  it  is  allowed  to  remain 
almost  untouched  until  the  first  week  in  September,  when  it  is  again  plowed,  usually 
lengthwise  of  the  first  furrow,  to  be  sown  for  wheat.  The  seed  is  then  covered  either 
with  a  harrow,  cultivator,  or  a  shovel  plow,  and  in  some  rare  cases  with  a  drilling 
machine,  which  completes  the  whole  process . 

“  Within  the  past  three  or  four  years  the  very  rational  opinion  has  gained  ground, 
that  under  a  careful  system  of  rotation  of  crops,  the  plan  of  making  naked  fallows  may 

be  dispensed  with  altogether .  To  what  extent  this  cheap  plan  of  growing  wheat 

may  be  extended  is  difficult  as  yet  to  determine,  but  it  is  quite  certain  that  extraordinary 
yields  are  produced  by  this  method  throughout  many  portions  of  the  best  wheat-growing 
counties  in  Ohio,  and  when  the  value  of  the  clover  crop  for  hay  or  pasturage  is  taken 
into  account,  it  brings  the  cost  of  producing  wheat  to  a  mere  nominal  standard  when 
compared  with  the  expensive  process  of  making  a  naked  summer  fallow  as  is  usually 
done  in  New  York  and  Pennsylvania . 

“  In  some  instances  wheat  is  made  to  follow  the  oat  crop,  in  which  case  the  latter 
succeeds  a  crop  of  corn,  which  if  well  cultivated  leaves  the  ground  in  a  good  condition 

for  oats .  A  still  worse  practice  than  this  is  adopted  by  some .  Allusion 

is  now  made  of  sowing  wheat  after  wheat,  for  a  succession  of  years,  by  simply  allowing 
occasionally  a  crop  of  corn  to  intervene.  The  past  season  thousands  of  acres  were  sown 
in  this  way,  and  at  the  present  time  (the  first  of  June)  a  finer  prospect  for  a  full  average 
crop  could  not  be  desired . 

“  The  foregoing  is  the  practice  in  the  counties  mentioned,  as  well  as  in  favorable 
sections  for  wheat  in  other  portions  of  the  state.  In  the  southern,  central  and  western 


23  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report ,  1845,  P-  367. 

24  Cultivator,  new  series,  VIII  (1851),  p.  257. 

25  Ibid.,  p.  258. 


WHEAT 


329 


range  of  counties,  the  almost  universal  practice  is  to  sow  wheat  after  the  corn  crop, 
or  with  it  before  it  is  harvested.  Naked  fallows  are  rarely  ever  made  in  the  corn  and 
grazing  regions  of  Ohio.  On  this  account  a  much  more  slovenly  practice  of  managing  the 
wheat  crop  prevails  where  corn  and  grass  are  the  main  dependence  of  the  farmer,  than 
where  wheat  forms  the  principle  staple.  Honorable  exceptions,  however,  are  made  to 

this  rule  in  every  county  and  neighborhood  of  the  state .  But  it  is  evident,  that 

so  long  as  the  fertility  of  the  soil  is  such  as  to  secure  a  heavy  crop  with  a  small  expendi¬ 
ture  of  labor,  that  only  a  few  can  be  persuaded  that  it  will  pay  cost  to  adopt  more 
expensive  systems  of  culture.  These  influences  and  others  of  a  like  character,  prevent 
to  a  great  extent,  the  adoption  of  systems  of  farm  management,  that  in  other  counties 
would  be  considered  essential  to  success.” 

WHEAT  IN  THE  WEST,  1840. 

West  of  Ohio  very  little  surplus  wheat  was  produced  in  1840.  The 
two  southern  tiers  of  counties  in  Michigan,  the  southern  half  of  Indiana,  the 
region  of  the  Illinois  River  in  Illinois,  and  of  the  Missouri  River  in  Missouri 


Table  39. — Sources  of  wheat  and  flour  entering  the  Erie  Canal 

at  Buffalo  in  1840 .* 


Where  produced. 

Flour. 

Wheat. 

Ohio  . 

Barrels. 

505,262 

112,215 

13,726 

2,259 

166 

Bushels. 

725,025 

07  240 

Michigan  . 

Indiana  . 

y/  >^49 

*48,279 

10,634 

Illinois  . 

Wisconsin  . 

Total  . 

633628 

881,187 

*  Cultivator,  VIII  (1841),  p.  28. 


were  the  leading  wheat  sections,  although  in  none  of  them  was  the  soil  entirely 
devoted  to  the  crop.  The  exportation  of  grain  from  the  Lake  Michigan  region 
had  but  just  begun  to  attract  attention.  Illinois  and  Indiana  produced  two- 
thirds  of  the  wheat  crop  raised  west  of  Ohio  and  north  of  the  Ohio  River. 

INCREASE  IN  WHEAT  PRODUCTION,  1840  TO  1850. 

During  the  forties  there  was  a  large  increase  in  wheat  production  in  the 
West.  By  1850,  over  15,000,000  bushels  of  grain  were  arriving  at  the  port  of 
Buffalo  annually  from  the  West,26  the  larger  part  of  which  was  produced  on 
the  newly  cultivated  prairie  farms.  The  increase  in  wheat  production  was 
greatest  in  southern  Michigan  and  Wisconsin,  northern  Illinois,  and  in  the 
region  between  the  Illinois  and  Mississippi  Rivers.  The  railroad  from  Pontiac, 
Michigan,  to  Detroit,  26  miles  in  length,  was  said  to  have  carried  40,000  barrels 
of  flour  in  the  year  1844.27  In  Iowa  and  Missouri  the  increase  was  compara¬ 
tively  small.  (See  figs.  71  and  72.) 

Before  1847  the  wheat  crops  in  the  Lake  Michigan  region  had  been  gener¬ 
ally  good,  and  glowing  reports  spread  over  the  country  regarding  the  possi- 


26  Buffalo  Board  of  Trade,  Annual  Report  (1869),  p.  20. 

27  Cultivator,  new  series,  I  (1844),  p.  177. 


330 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


bilities  of  wheat  production  in  this  region.  But  from  1847  to  1853  there  was  a 
general  failure  of  the  winter-wheat  crop,  especially  on  the  prairie  lands,  caus¬ 
ing  uncertainty  and  general  dissatisfaction  among  the  wheat  producers.  Many 
farmers  were  led  to  give  up  the  exclusive  raising  of  wheat  and  took  up  more 
general  lines  of  farming.  Others  substituted  spring  wheat  for  winter  wheat 
in  an  attempt  to  continue  the  cropping.  Many  were  said  to  have  left  for 
California  in  their  discouragement  at  having  lost  two  or  three  crops  of  wheat. 

The  situation  was  thus  described  by  a  writer  in  The  Cultivator : 28 

“Contrary  to  the  expectations  of  the  first  settlers  of  the  Great  West,  the  wheat¬ 
growing  business  is  subject  to  more  casualties  than  is  experienced  in  timbered  countries; 
and  in  many  cases  the  business  has  been  abandoned,  under  the  prevailing  notion  that  a 
prairie  soil,  when  subjected  to  a  severe  course  of  cropping,  is  unadapted  to  the  growth 
of  wheat.  This  opinion  ebbs  and  flows,  according  to  the  result  of  the  harvests ;  and 
seasons  like  the  present,  when  the  crop  is  almost  universally  a  good  one,  it  would 
find  but  few  advocates;  whereas,  last  year  the  almost  entire  failure  of  the  crop  so  far 
discouraged  the  wheat  growers,  that  it  was  difficult  to  convince  those  engaged  in  the 
business,  that  the  country  was  admirably  adapted  for  the  production  of  wheat . ' 

SPECIALIZATION  IN  WISCONSIN  AND  NORTHERN 

ILLINOIS. 

In  Wisconsin  and  northern  Illinois  the  early  settlers  turned  their  attention 
almost  exclusively  to  wheat.  In  Wisconsin  the  production  increased  from 
212,000  bushels  in  1839  to  4,286,000  bushels  in  1849.  Population  during  the 
same  period  increased  from  31,000  to  305,000.  Sheep,  cattle,  and  hogs  were 
indeed  kept,  and  corn,  oats,  barley,  and  other  crops  were  raised;  but  these 
enterprises  were  considered  of  minor  importance  by  the  farmer  located  west 
of  Lake  Michigan.  Wheat  was  the  great  staple,  the  crop  from  which  a  money 
income  was  expected.  Rotation  received  little  attention,  fertilizing  practically 
none,  and  summer  fallowing  was  rarely  practiced. 

The  reasons  advanced  for  devoting  attention  so  exclusively  to  wheat  were 
many.  In  the  first  place,  the  soil  was  considered  well  adapted  to  the  crop  and 
in  the  early  years  large  yields  were  obtained.  The  cost  of  transporting  wheat 
to  market  was  less  in  proportion  to  its  weight  and  value  than  that  of  corn  and 
oats,  and  where  the  produce  must  be  carried  in  a  wagon  70  to  100  miles  to 
market,  this  was  an  item  of  importance.  The  extent  of  the  specialization  in 
wheat  may  be  shown  by  the  following  comparison;  In  i860  the  approximate 
ratio  of  bushels  of  wheat  to  bushels  of  corn  produced  was  as  follows :  in 
New  York,  1  to  4;  in  Ohio,  Illinois,  and  Iowa,  1  to  5 ;  in  Michigan,  1  to  1.5; 
in  Wisconsin,  2  to  1. 

CAUSES  OF  CROP  FAILURES  ON  PRAIRIE  FARMS. 

In  Wisconsin  it  appears  that  the  failure  was  especially  severe  on  the  prairie 
lands.  A  Fond  du  Lac  County  correspondent  in  1853  wrote  thus : 29 

“The  timbered  sections  of  our  country  uniformly  produce  good  crops  of  winter 
wheat,  the  average  yield  being,  probably,  not  less  than  twenty-five  bushels  to  the  acre. 
The  1  oak  openings  ’  also  produce  this  amount  in  favorable  seasons ;  but  the  crop  on  this 
description  of  land  is  much  more  precarious,  the  cold  winds  of  winter  and  early  spring 


28  Cultivator,  new  series,  IX  (1852),  p.  346. 

20  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report,  1853,  Agriculture,  152. 


WHEAT 


331 


frequently  destroying  the  entire  crop;  and,  finally,  repeated  failures  have  caused  its  entire 
abandonment  by  the  farmers  of  the  prairie.  And  yet,  I  have  known  some  good  yields 
of  winter  grain  on  prairie  soil ;  such  generally  followed  the  first  breaking  up  of  the 
land . ” 

Another  wrote  from  Racine  County  in  1849  as  follows:30 

“  Wheat  has  been  our  staple  product .  But  for  three  or  four  years  past  it  has 

been  a  precarious  crop,  especially  on  old  lands,  owing  doubtless  to  the  common  fault  of 
almost  every  farmer  of  bringing  more  land  under  cultivation  while  it  is  fresh  and 
clean,  than  they  can  afterwards  manure  and  cultivate  well.” 

A  third  31  reported  that  “  wheat  in  this  vicinity  is  mostly  raised  on  the 
prairies,  but  the  timber  lands  are  better  adapted  to  its  culture.”  The  report 
from  Rock  County  32  in  1851  was : 

“  The  causes  are  obvious,  the  excuse  reasonable . To  surround  a  quarter  section 

of  land  with  a  sod  fence  ....  break  and  sow  it  to  wheat — harvest  the  same  and  stack 
it — plough  the  stubble  once,  and  sow  it  again  with  wheat — thrash  the  previous  crop 
and  haul  it  to  the  Lake,  was  considered  good  farming  in  Rock  County  [Wisconsin], 
continued  from  year  to  year ;  and  hundreds  confidently  expected  to  win,  by  going  it 
blind,  in  this  very  unscientific  manner.  And  for  a  few  years  it  succeeded ;  but  a  short 
crop  or  two,  with  a  depressed  market,  has  brought  them  up  all  standing.  The  cry  is  now 
heard,  what  shall  we  do  to  be  saved  ?  ” 

A  Dane  County  correspondent  says : 33 

“  Men  have  come  here  to  settle  on  farms  because  land  was  cheap — have  little  or  no 
capital — poor  houses  and  no  barns — a  small  supply  of  stock — some  land  under  the 
plough  and  fenced — embarrassed  with  the  payment  of  interest,  taxes,  and  store  debts — 
and  depending  on  the  next  crop  of  wheat  for  relief,  which,  when  gathered  and  taken 
to  market,  affords  no  profit  on  the  cost  of  production.” 

It  was  the  general  opinion  that  on  the  whole  no  money  had  been  made  in 
the  production  of  wheat.34  The  farmers  began  to  turn  to  dairying,  to  the 
rearing  of  horses,  cattle,  sheep,  and  swine,  and  to  the  growing  of  flax  and 
barley.  To  some,  California  seemed  the  only  resource,  and  to  that  gilded 
region  many  fled  as  to  a  city  of  refuge.35  Others  continued  in  the  same  path 
with  the  firm  expectation  that  better  times  must  come.  With  the  high  prices 
that  prevailed  from  1854  to  1857,  faith  was  restored  in  wheat.  All  thoughts  of 
turning  to  general  farming  were  abandoned,  and  specialization  began  again. 
Yields,  it  is  true,  remained  low,  but  high  prices,  nevertheless,  made  farmers 
hopeful.  Although  high  prices  lasted  only  2  or  3  years,  their  effect  was  suffi¬ 
cient  to  perpetuate  until  i860  the  one-crop  system  of  farming. 

SYSTEMS  OF  WHEAT  CROPPING  ON  THE  PRAIRIES. 

Three  systems  of  wheat  cropping  were  common  on  the  prairies.  To  break 
prairie  land  in  the  month  of  June  and  sow  in  September  was  considered  the 
best  and  most  certain  method.36  Frequently  the  land  was  cross-ploughed  be¬ 
fore  seeding,  but  most  farmers  ploughed  but  once.  A  second  method  was 

30  Ibid.,  1849,  p.  205. 

31  Loc.  cit. 

32  Wis.  State  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions,  1851,  p.  211. 

33  Ibid.,  133,  161. 

34  Prairie  Farmer,  X  (1850),  p.  349. 

35  Wis.  State  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions,  1851,  p.  229. 

36  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report,  1848,  p.  542. 


332 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


sowing  after  small  grain  by  turning  under  an  oat  or  wheat  stubble,  plowing 
again  before  seeding,  and  finally  sowing  the  seed  and  running  over  the  field 
two  or  three  times  with  the  harrow.  Where  old  land  was  seeded,  it  was  con¬ 
sidered  best  to  plow  in  narrow  lands,  making  the  open  or  center  furrow  deep, 
so  that  it  could  readily  carry  off  the  water.  By  the  third  method  wheat  seed 
was  sown  in  the  midst  of  the  corn  in  September  or  October. 

Some  farmers  varied  the  practice  by  cutting  up  and  shocking  the  corn  in 
parallel  rows  across  the  field,  leaving  the  strips  to  be  sown  with  a  spring  crop. 
In  the  corn-producing  regions  of  southern  Indiana  and  central  Illinois,  wheat 
sown  among  com  was  the  common  method.  In  Missouri,  wheat  was  generally 
sown  on  corn  land  after  the  corn  had  been  cut.  But  as  wheat  culture  extended, 
some  farmers  were  adopting  the  plan  of  sowing  on  fallow  land.  On  farms 


Fig.  73. — Wheat,  1859.  Each  dot  represents  100,000  bushels. 

Illinois,  Indiana  and  Wisconsin  now  led  the  states  in  wheat  production.  The 
Lake  Michigan  region  had  become  the  leading  wheat  growing  area  of  the  country. 

In  California  and  Oregon  production  of  wheat  had  rapidly  increased  since  1850, 
while  in  New  York  and  Pennsylvania  there  had  been  a  decline. 

raising  tobacco,  the  wheat  was  generally  sown  on  the  tobacco  land  after  taking 
off  the  crop. 

ENEMIES  OF  THE  WHEAT  CROP. 

Winterkilling,  rust,  blight,  and  the  chinch  bug  were  common  enemies  of 
the  wheat  crop  in  the  West.  The  first  two  affected  principally  winter  wheat, 
but  after  1849  there  were  many  complaints  of  the  attacks  of  blight  on  spring 
wheat.  While  the  first  crop  on  a  prairie  sod  was  usually  exempt  from  these 
enemies,  in  later  years  wheat  on  prairie  land  seemed  to  be  more  susceptible 
than  when  grown  on  the  openings  or  wooded  lands.37  In  the  East,  winter- 
killing,  the  Hessian  fly,  the  weevil,  and  the  rust  were  common  enemies  of  the 


37  Wis.  State  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions  (1851),  p.  232. 


WHEAT 


333 


wheat  crop.  Of  the  many  remedies  advocated,  and  sometimes  practiced,  the 
most  successful  were  the  improvement  of  the  soil,  late  sowing  to  avoid  the 
Hessian  fly,  early  sowing  to  avoid  rust  and  winter  killing,  the  grazing  of 
the  wheat  in  the  fall  and  early  spring  to  check  the  Hessian  fly,  and  planting 
in  drills  to  check  the  rust. 

WHEAT  PRODUCTION,  1850  TO  1860. 

During  the  io  years  1850  to  i860  the  center  of  wheat  production  was 
pushed  farther  west  than  in  any  previous  decade  in  the  history  of  the  country. 
(Fig.  73.)  By  i860  the  States  of  Illinois,  Indiana,  and  Wisconsin  had  far 
surpassed  Pennsylvania  and  New  York  in  the  amount  of  wheat  produced. 
The  last  two  States  showed  a  decrease  since  1849.  Southern  Michigan  and  the 
prairie  country,  Illinois,  Wisconsin,  eastern  Iowa,  and  southeastern  Minnesota, 
was  the  region  of  greatest  increase.  Illinois  in  i860  led  the  States  in  wheat 
production,  Indiana  ranked  second,  Wisconsin  third,  and  Ohio  fourth. 

RAVAGES  OF  THE  MIDGE  IN  NEW  YORK  AND 

NEW  ENGLAND. 

To  New  York  wheat  growers  the  decade  was  one  of  general  hardship,  while 
to  the  western  farmer  it  was  one  of  rejoicing  over  good  crops  and  high  prices, 
especially  during  the  middle  years  of  the  fifties.  The  New  York  farmer  was 
suffering  from  the  partial  failure  of  his  wheat  crop,  while  the  western  farmers 
were  rapidly  expanding  the  wheat  area.  There  was  a  growing  disposition  to 
reduce  the  wheat  acreage  in  New  York  and  to  devote  the  land  to  some  other 
crop. 

Census  figures  show  the  New  York  wheat  crop  of  1859  to  have  been  nearly 
4,500,000  bushels  below  that  of  1849.  A  comparison  of  these  figures  with 
those  of  New  York  State  census  in  1855  indicate  a  decline  of  over  4,000,000 
bushels  from  1849  t0  1854,  and  a  further  decline  of  nearly  a  half  million 
bushels  from  that  date  to  1859.  Two  great  causes  of  the  decline  were  the 
ravages  of  the  midge  and  soil  depletion. 

Since  1830,  the  destruction  of  wheat  crops  by  the  midge  had  attracted  much 
attention  in  eastern  New  York  and  New  England.  This  pest  was  first  seen 
in  western  Vermont  in  the  year  1820,  though  not  until  1828  and  1829  did  it 
become  so  numerous  and  destructive  as  to  attract  public  attention.  In  1850 
the  ravages  of  the  midge  attracted  much  attention  in  New  York  State  west 
of  Lake  Cayuga,  and  in  1854  injury  was  general  in  the  wheat-growing  region. 
James  Wadsworth  gives  the  following  account  of  the  appearance  of  the 
midge  in  Monroe  and  Livingston  Counties : 38 

“The  midge  was  seen  here  a  little  in  1854;  it  came  from  the  East;  more  were  seen 
in  1855,  doing  no  material  damage  in  Livingston,  but  considerable  in  Monroe.  But  in 
1856  the  midge  took  from  one-half  to  two-thirds  of  the  crop  in  Livingston  on  the 
uplands  and  nearly  all  on  the  flats.  At  least  two  thousand  acres,  on  flats  which  would 
have  yielded  thirty  bushels  per  acre,  were  not  harvested.  It  was  still  worse  in  1857,  taking 
over  two-thirds  of  the  crop.  And  in  1858,  of  the  white  wheats  there  was  very  little 

to  harvest . Very  little  white  wheat  was  now  sown  in  western  New  York  and 

the  midge  had  reduced  the  value  of  all  the  wheat  lands  at  least  forty  per  cent.  Lands 
which  sold  here  readily  for  seventy  dollars  can  now  be  bought  for  forty  dollars  per  acre." 


88  N.  Y.  State  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions,  XX  (i860),  pp.  750-756;  ibid.  (1858),  p.  300. 


334 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


OTHER  CAUSES  OF  DECLINE  IN  WHEAT  CROPS  IN 

THE  EAST. 

The  failure  of  the  wheat  crop,  however,  was  not  attributed  to  the  ravages 
of  the  midge  alone ;  winterkilling  and  crop  failure  had  been  frequent  for  many 
years  before  the  occurrence  of  the  midge.  From  Ontario  County,  in  1855, 
a  great  falling  off  in  the  wheat  crop  was  reported,  the  reasons  assigned  being 
winterkilling  in  unfavorable  seasons.39  A  writer  to  the  Country  Gentleman 
in  1859,  took  the  following  view  as  to  causes : 40 

“  In  the  wheat  midge  we  have  the  alleged  cause  of  the  failure  of  the  wheat  crop,  and 
its  ravages  have  been  truly  disheartening.  But  many  serious  failures  occurred  before 
this  injury  became  general — failures  from  poverty  of  soil,  caused  by  sowing  wheat 
after  wheat  or  other  exhausting  crops — from  want  of  drainage,  and  consequent  winter- 
killing,  or  rust— from  late  sowing  on  imperfectly  prepared  ground,  also  inducing  light 
and  rust,  and  from  poor  management  generally.  All  these  causes  prepare  the  wheat 
plant  for  the  attacks  of  the  midge.” 

It  would  seem  that  the  wheat  soils  of  western  New  York  had  become  gen 
erally  depleted  through  continued  cropping  with  the  use  of  lime  and  gypsum 
as  had  been  the  case  in  the  Mohawk  Valley  some  20  years  before.  Soil  deple- 
tion  resulted  in  frequent  winterkilling  with  crop  failures,  the  impoverished 
condition  of  the  soil  making  the  wheat  plant  very  susceptible  to  the  attacks  of 
the  midge,  and  thus  reducing  the  already  small  yield.  The  New  York  Agricul¬ 
tural  Society,  after  an  extensive  investigation  of  the  wheat  midge,  reported 
in  1859  “  that  where  lands  have  been  thoroughly  underdrained,  thus  receiving 
an  earlier  sowing  as  well  as  ripening  of  the  wheat,  far  less  damage  has  been 
sustained  from  the  ravages  of  the  insect.”  41 

PROGRESS  RESULTING  FROM  CROP  FAILURES.— LAND 
DRAINAGE  AND  SOIL  IMPROVEMENT. 

The  frequent  winterkilling  and  the  failure  of  the  wheat  crop  were  leading 
to  a  wide  interest  in  land  drainage  and  improvement.  The  search  for  infor¬ 
mation  brought  John  Johnson  to  the  front  with  his  years  of  experience  in  land 
drainage  and  soil  improvement.  In  1855  he  reported  : 42 

“  A  few  years  ago  when  the  midge  destroyed  the  most  of  the  wheat,  I  had  six 
neighbors  joining  farms  with  me,  and  I  don’t  know  of  any  of  them  that  had  over  seven 
bushels  per  acre,  and  some  not  so  much  as  that,  and  my  farm  raised  between  twenty- 
eight  and  twenty-nine  bushels  per  acre,  and  the  land  being  drained  was  the  main 
cause.  Since  that  time  all  of  my  neighbors  have  drained  more  or  less  and  some  very 
extensively.” 

In  1858  he  wrote  to  the  New  York  Agricultural  Society:43  “  My  crop 
[of  wheat]  has  not  been  under  twenty-five  bushels  per  acre,  with  the  excep* 
tion  of  last  year.”  Then  the  failure  was  owing  to  drought  and  cold.  “  But 
drainage  won’t  do  all,”  he  maintained ;  “  the  next  thing  needful  is  manure, 
made  by  domestic  animals — and  it  really  does  appear  as  if  the  farmers  around 

39  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report,  1855,  Agriculture,  195. 

40  Country  Gentleman,  XIII  (1859),  P-  89. 

41  N.  Y.  State  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions,  XIX  (1859),  p.  6. 

42  Ibid.,  XV  (1855),  p.  257. 

43  Ibid.,  XVIII  (1858),  p.  294. 


WHEAT 


335 


here  would  never  take  heed  to  this  one  other  thing  so  needful  to  successful 
farming/’ 44 

The  failure  of  the  wheat  crop  brought  the  New  York  farmer  squarely  up 
against  the  fact  of  soil  depletion.  Following  the  lead  of  John  Johnson,  there 
was  a  movement  towards  land  drainage,  crop  rotation,  and  grazing.  The 
wheat  was  sown  at  an  earlier  date  to  avoid  the  midge.  More  care  was  given 
to  the  selection,  the  preparation,  and  the  care  of  wheat  lands.  Increasing  atten¬ 
tion  to  drainage  and  deep  cultivation  were  reported  in  1855  as  among  the  most 
cheering  indications  of  the  advancement  of  agriculture  in  New  York.45  The 
New  York  wheat  crops  of  1858,  1859,  and  i860  were  generally  reported  as 
good.  The  midge  was  less  troublesome  than  in  previous  years.  By  1859 
wheat  production  was  again  on  the  increase.  The  crop  of  that  year  was 
reported  as  the  best  for  many  years. 

In  other  Eastern  States  the  attacks  of  the  midge  were  not  as  severe  as  in 
New  York.  In  New  England  about  as  much  wheat  was  grown  in  1859  as  10 
years  earlier.  The  high  prices  of  the  decade,  the  temporary  cessation  of  severe 
attacks  of  the  insects,  and  the  reintroduction  of  winter  wheat  had  put  the 
New  England  farmer  into  a  more  hopeful  mood  regarding  his  wheat.  Maine 
and  Vermont  showed  a  slight  decrease  in  the  amount  produced,  while  the  other 
New  England  States  showed  slight  increase.  In  Maine  excellent  yields  of 
wheat  were  still  obtained  in  the  newly  cleared  sections  of  Aroostook,  Franklin, 
Somerset,  and  other  counties.46  Wheat  succeeded  best  on  the  hilly  lands.  It 
was  thought  that  on  the  hilly  lands  “  where  the  wind  blows  ”  the  insects  both¬ 
ered  less.47  “If  you  would  succeed  in  wheat,  raise  it  where  the  wind  blows  ” 
had  become  an  axiom  with  the  New  Hampshire  wheat-grower.  In  eastern 
Pennsylvania,  Maryland,  and  Delaware,  where  the  attacks  of  the  midge  had 
not  been  as  severe  as  in  New  York,  the  high  prices  of  grain,  together  with 
the  introduction  of  guano  and  improvements  in  culture,  were  said  to  have 
induced  farmers  to  grow  more  wheat  than  formerly.48 

DECLINING  WHEAT  YIELD  IN  OHIO. 

In  eastern  Ohio  the  declining  wheat  yield,  attributed  to  soil  depletion  with 
winterkilling  and,  after  1854,  to  the  attacks  of  the  midge,  had  become  a 
matter  of  great  concern.  For  some  time  the  evils  of  constantly  cropping  the 
land  with  the  return  of  little  manure  had  been  apparent,  until  in  1854,  with 
the  first  severe  attack  of  the  wheat  midge,  the  average  yield  of  wheat  in  the 
State  was  reported  at  8  bushels  per  acre.  In  1858  it  was  10.3  bushels,  in  1859 
7.01  bushels,  in  i860  about  13  bushels. 

It  was  the  opinion  of  John  H.  Klippart,  secretary  of  the  Ohio  State  Board 
of  Agriculture  in  1859,  that  Ohio  had  reached  her  maximum  of  wheat  produc¬ 
tion  and  if  not  retrograding  was  at  least  stationary.49  “  Turn  your  attention 
to  renovating  your  lands,”  he  advises,  “  instead  of  dreaming  of  the  fertile 


44 Ibid.,  XX  (i860),  p.  337. 

45  N.  Y.  State  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions,  XV,  (1855),  p.  3. 

46  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report,  1862,  Agriculture,  51. 

47  N.  H.  State  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions  (1850-51-52),  p.  74. 

48  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report,  1855,  Agriculture,  192. 

49  The  Wheat  Plant,  307,  322. 


336 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


West,  and  make  Ohio  what  she  was  intended  to  be,  the  granary  of  the 
Union.”  60  Many  small  Ohio  wheat  farmers,  discouraged  with  their  small 
yields  and  attracted  by  the  prairie  lands  of  the  West,  sold  their  farms  to 
cattle  graziers  and  moved  west  to  begin  wheat-growing  again  in  Illinois,  Iowa, 
and  Wisconsin.  The  Ohio  wheat  yield  of  1859,  owing  to  a  severe  frost  in 
June,  was  much  below  the  average,  especially  in  the  eastern  section  of  the 
State.  Wayne  County,  which  reported  an  average  yield  of  13  bushels  in  1858 
and  16  bushels  in  i860,  reported  an  average  of  only  3  bushels  per  acre  in 
1859.  In  Erie  County,  where  the  yield  was  said  to  be  about  the  average,  a 
large  portion  of  the  crop  was  sent  south  to  sections  of  the  State  which  had 
usually  exported  large  quantities  of  wheat,  thus  reversing  the  usual  course 
of  trade.51 


THE  PREEMINENCE  OF  THE  WEST,  1850  TO  1860. 


The  census  of  i860  shows  Illinois,  Indiana,  and  Wisconsin,  in  the  order 
named,  leading  in  the  production  of  wheat.  In  1849,  f°ur  eastern  States, 
Virginia,  Ohio,  New  York,  and  Pennsylvania,  produced  twice  as  much  wheat 
as  the  three  western  States  named  above;  in  1859  the  three  western  States 
produced  50  per  cent  more  than  the  four  eastern  States.  Minnesota  produced 
over  2,000,000  bushels,  Iowa  nearly  8,500,000.  The  increase  in  transportation 
facilities,  together  with  the  high  prices  and  good  crops  during  the  years  1854, 
1855,  and  1856,  led  to  a  rapid  increase  of  the  wheat  acreage  during  the  middle 
years  of  the  decade.62  Large  areas  of  prairie  land  were  broken  for  the  first 
time  and  put  into  wheat.  The  improvement  of  the  reaper  enabled  more  acres 
of  grain  to  be  raised  per  man.  By  1855,  California  could  report : 53 


■ 


“  There  is  no  longer  any  need  of  shipping  breadstuffs  from  the  Atlantic  to  the  Pacific 
Coast.  We  have  an  abundance  of  our  own  to  spare.  Flour  and  grain  are  cheaper  here 
than  in  New  York.” 


Systems  of  cropping  were  much  the  same  as  in  the  previous  decade.  In 
the  northern  region  of  Illinois,  spring  wheat  was  now  grown  almost  exclusive-  i 
ly,  in  central  Illinois  spring  and  winter  wheat,  and  in  the  southern  part  winter 
wheat  alone  was  sown.  In  Iowa,  winter  wheat  was  reported  to  have  been  an 
uncertain  crop  for  several  years  and  spring  wheat  had  taken  the  precedence 
on  prairie  lands,  although  winter  wheat  was  still  usually  raised  on  a  prairie  sod 
and  frequently  upon  second  sod,  or  the  second  year  after  breaking.  On  the  S 
timber  soil  winter  wheat  was  principally  grown.54  The  wheat  crops  of  1857, 
1858,  and  1859  in  the  prairie  region  were  generally  poor.  The  chinch  bug 
severely  injured  the  Illinois  wheat  crop  of  1858; 65  the  Hessian  fly,  the  midge, 
the  smut,  and  the  rust  were  all  serious  enemies.  Prices  were  low ;  the  western 
farmer  was  for  the  second  time  becoming  uneasy  regarding  wheat-growing 
on  the  prairies,  when  the  “  luxuriant  crop  ”  of  i860  again  revived  his  faith.66 

50  Klippart,  The  Wheat  Plant,  322. 

51  Ohio  State  Board  of  Agriculture,  14th  Annual  Report  (1859),  P-  152. 

52  Country  Gentleman,  X  (1857),  p.  90. 

**Ibid.,V  (1855),  p.  233. 

64  Iowa  State  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions,  1857,  p.  256. 

55  Ill.  State  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions,  i860,  p.  335. 

50  Ibid.,  336. 


WHEAT 


337 


USE  OF  MACHINERY  IN  SEEDING  AND  CULTIVATING. 

In  1840,  wheat  was  sown  broadcast  by  hand.  The  common  practice  in  Ohio 
was  to  sow  the  seed  on  the  plowed  surface  and  harrow  it  in  with  a  harrow 
or  steel-tooth  cultivator.  Some  farmers,  however,  plowed  the  seed  in  with  a 
shovel-plow,  and  followed  the  plow  with  the  harrow.  A  few,  following  the 
advice  of  Jethro  Tull,  were  beginning  by  1844  to  drill  their  wheat  with  the 
hope  of  securing  freedom  from  rust,  mildew,  and  winterkilling.67  It  is  inter¬ 
esting  to  note  that  the  work  of  Jethro  Tull,  printed  more  than  100  years 
before  (1733),  was  much  quoted  during  this  period.  One  writer  of  the  time, 
after  discussing  the  methods  of  Tull,  concludes  with  the  statement: 68 

“  This  plan — though  not  adapted  to  American  farming,  for  the  reasons  that,  generally, 
we  wish  grass  to  follow  our  wheat  crop — was  yet  deemed  sufficiently  plausible  to  deter¬ 
mine  us  to  give  a  fair  trial  to  the  drilling,  in  comparison  with  the  broadcast  plan.” 

By  1850,  seed  drills  were  generally  used  in  the  wheat  region  of  Pennsylvania 
and  New  York;  in  Ohio  only  a  few  had  as  yet  been  tried,  but  many  farmers 
were  said  to  be  already  convinced  of  their  utility.59  In  New  England,  where 
the  fields  were  small,  wheat  was  sown  broadcast  by  hand  and  covered  with  a 
light  plow,  cultivator,  or  common  harrow.  In  the  prairie  region  of  the  West, 
the  wheat  when  sown  in  the  midst  of  corn,  was  worked  into  the  soil  with  the 
shovel-plow,  the  cultivator,  or  with  a  small  ordinary  plow.  When  seeded  upon 
newly  broken  sod,  it  was  commonly  sown  broadcast  and  harrowed  in.  On 
old  land  the  harrow,  the  plow,  the  cultivator,  or  the  bush  were  used  to  work 
the  seed  into  the  ground.  The  roller  was  frequently  run  over  the  land  at  the 
time  of  seeding.  By  i860  the  drill  was  rapidly  coming  into  use.  Much  of  the 
wheat  in  the  Mississippi  Valley  was  now  sown  by  machine.  West  of  the 
Mississippi  the  drill  was  yet  but  little  used. 

REAPERS  AND  THRESHERS. 

The  wheat  crop  of  the  early  forties  was  reaped  with  a  cradle.  (See  figs. 
15,  16  and  17,  p.  207.)  The  reaping  machine  had  been  invented  and  tried  and 
some  few  were  already  in  use  in  the  regions  of  Maryland  and  Virginia,  but 
as  yet  they  were  in  the  experimental  stage  and  their  influence  on  the  wheat 
industry  was  in  the  future.  After  1846  the  use  of  the  reaper  rapidly  increased. 
The  era  of  high  prices  in  the  middle  years  of  the  decade  caused  an  almost 
universal  demand  for  reapers.  When  the  wheat  on  an  acre  of  prairie  sold 
for  several  times  the  price  of  the  land  it  seemed  a  sure  investment  to  seed  more 
wheat  and  buy  a  reaper.  In  1855  so  many  were  in  use  at  different  points  that 
they  had  ceased  to  be  a  curiosity,  and  from  that  time  on  they  were  adopted 
about  as  rapidly  as  they  could  be  manufactured.  Railroads  made  it  possible 
to  transport  grain  economically  from  far  inland,  while  the  reaper  made  it  now 
possible  to  harvest  larger  areas  than  formerly.60 

In  1840,  threshing  was  commonly  done  by  machine,  although  a  considerable 
amount  was  still  “  tramped  out  ”  by  horses  and  cattle  or  beaten  out  with  a 

67  Cultivator,  new  series,  I  (1844),  P-  44- 

88  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report,  1844,  p.  180. 

59  Ohio  State  Board  of  Agric.,  3d  Annual  Report  (1848),  p.  174. 

60  U.  S.  Census  of  1880,  III,  Agriculture,  521. 

23 


338 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


flail.  The  latter  methods  were  chiefly  used  in  the  newly  settled  parts  of  the 
West,  and  in  eastern  regions  where  but  little  grain  was  grown.61  Ten  years 
later  in  the  wheat-growing  regions  much  of  the  wheat  was  threshed  by  port¬ 
able  machines.  Many  farmers  owned  their  own  machines  and  threshed  from 
the  shock,  while  others  stacked  their  wheat  and  had  it  threshed  at  a  later  date 
by  traveling  outfits.  In  many  of  the  more  remote  and  newly  settled  regions, 
where  markets  were  poor  and  the  settlers  of  small  means,  the  threshing  ma¬ 
chine  had  not  yet  been  introduced.  In  all  wheat-growing  regions,  by  i860,  the 
wheat  was  threshed  and  separated  by  machine,  the  newer  and  larger  machines 
screening  and  cleaning  the  grain  as  well.62  An  Illinois  writer  thus  describes 
the  method  of  threshing  on  the  prairie  in  1853: 63 

“At  first  farmers  owned  their  own  threshers,  but  now  they  mostly  belong  to  jobbers, 
who  go  about  threshing  and  cleaning  grain  at  a  certain  price  per  bushel,  thus  saving  the 
farmer  the  cost  of  a  fanning  mill  and  the  labor  of  recleaning  and  screening  as  was  the 
case  until  within  the  last  few  years.  As  the  great  mass  of  farmers  on  the  prairie  have 
no  barns  this  system  of  threshing  has  great  advantages  and  the  farmer  is  at  no  outlay  of 
capital  for  machines.  Farmers  who  have  large  barns  generally  own  a  different  style  of 
machine,  these  are  called  horse-power  and  are  adapted  to  one,  two  or  three  horses.  Some 
of  these  have  only  separators  attached  so  as  to  separate  the  straw  from  the  chaff  and 
grain.  In  this  case  the  threshing  progresses  according  to  the  demands  of  the  stock  for 

straw  and  chaff . Steam  threshers  were  introduced  here  and  there  before  the  close 

of  the  period,  but  they  can  hardly  be  said  to  have  come  into  common  use.” 

61  N.  Y.  State  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions ,  II  (1842),  p.  160. 

62  U.  S.  Census  of  1880,  III,  Agriculture,  520. 

63  Loc.  cit. 


Chapter  XXVII. — Corn. 

In  1840  corn  was  grown  in  every  State  east  of  the  Mississippi  River  and 
in  the  States  west  of  the  river  from  Iowa  south  to  Louisiana.  Of  the  total 
corn  crop  of  1839,  46  per  cent  was  produced  in  the  South,  23  per  cent  in 
the  border  States  and  31  per  cent  in  the  northern  States.  Tennessee  and 
Kentucky  were  the  two  leading  corn-growing  States.  The  region  of  the  Ohio 
River  had  become  a  prominent  corn-producing  center.  (See  fig.  74.)  West 


Fig.  74. — Corn,  1839.  Each  dot  represents  300,000  bushels. 

^  The  limestone  region  of  Kentucky  and  the  bottom  lands  of  the  Miami,  the 
Scioto,  the  Wabash,  the  Illinois  and  the  Missouri  rivers  were  prominent  corn 
growing  regions  in  1840.  In  the  eastern  states  corn  production  was  generally  in¬ 
creasing.  In  Maryland  it  was  a  leading  crop. 


of  the  Mississippi  its  cultivation  was  extending  up  the  Des  Moines  River  into 
central  Iowa  and  along  the  Missouri  River  and  its  tributaries  into  western 
Missouri.  In  the  territory  west  of  central  Ohio  corn  rather  than  wheat  was 
the  leading  crop. 

BETTER  TILLAGE  AND  FERTILIZATION  INCREASES  CORN 

CROP  IN  THE  EAST. 

Maryland,  Delaware,  New  Jersey,  and  southeastern  Pennsylvania  were  the 
leading  corn  regions  of  the  East  in  1840.  In  New  York,  the  wheat-growing 
section  in  the  western  part  of  the  State  and  the  valley  of  the  Hudson  in  the 
east  were  the  outstanding  corn  areas.  During  the  forties  the  production  of 


339 


340 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


corn  considerably  increased  in  all  eastern  States  as  a  result  of  three  causes . 

(i)  a  larger  amount  was  planted  in  substitution  for  fallow  ;  (2)  more  manure 
was  applied  and  in  greater  variety ;  (3)  more  care  was  taken  in  tillage. 

In  central  and  western  New  York  corn  and  roots  were  being  substituted 
in  place  of  the  fallow  in  the  rotation,  as  the  low  average  yield  of  wheat  made 
it  no  longer  profitable  to  have  that  crop  follow  a  summer  fallow.  In  the 
northeastern  States  corn  had  its  place  in  a  more  or  less  definite  system  of  crop 
rotation  with  the  application  of  large  amounts  of  labor  and  manure.  Manure 
was  used  on  the  corn  land  in  large  quantities  and  with  peculiar  care.  10  to 
20  tons  of  farm  manure  to  the  acre  was  a  usual  amount.  In  Wayne  County  1 
it  was  reported  that  “  corn  success  appears  to  be  chiefly  dependent  on  a  heavy 

supply  of  manure,  well  mixed  with  the  soil . ”  Lime,  gypsum,  and 

ashes  were  extensively  used.  It  was  common  practice  to  put  a  fork-full  of 
well-rotted  manure  or  compost  into  each  hill,  and  usually,  also,  a  little  lime  or 
plaster,  at  the  time  of  planting,  and  again  at  the  time  of  the  first  hoeing.  As 
one  farmer  2  described  it :  “  I  use  some  lime,  ashes  and  plaster  on  corn  ground, 
equal  parts  put  in  the  hill  when  planting,  about  a  gill  in  each  hill,  and  again 
at  the  second  hoeing  put  on  about  the  same  quantity.” 

Subsequent  culture  included  two  hand  hoeings.  The  process  was  thus  de¬ 
scribed  by  a  writer  from  Steuben  County  in  1852 : 3 

“  As  soon  as  the  corn  is  of  sufficient  size,  start  the  cultivator,  and  have  a  boy  follow 
to  see  that  there  is  none  covered.  Immediately  after,  put  half  a  handful  of  unleached  ( 
ashes  on  each  hill.  In  about  a  week  go  through  with  the  cultivator  again,  each  way; 
follow  with  the  hoe,  and  thin  out  the  stalks  to  four  in  each  hill.  Cultivate  and  hoe 
again  before  tasselling.” 

Often  the  corn  was  harrowed  as  soon  as  up,  a  boy  following  to  uncover  and  ; 
set  up  any  fallen  corn.  For  the  second  and  third  cultivation  the  plow  was 
used,  or  occasionally  the  shovel  plow,  but  both  these  implements  were  being 
gradually  replaced  by  the  cultivator.  From  Monroe  County  it  was  reported 
in  1853: 4 

“  Of  late,  some  farmers  have  adopted  the  plan  of  using  the  two-horse  wheel  cultivator 

to  run  through  the  rows . The  middle  teeth  are  taken  out,  and  two  rows  of  corn 

are  cultivated  at  once,  .  .  .  .” 

. 

INCREASING  CORN  PRODUCTION  IN  NEW  ENGLAND, 

1840  TO  1850. 

: 

In  New  England  the  production  of  corn  was  increasing.  The  general  fail¬ 
ure  of  the  crop  during  the  years  1836  and  1837,  the  “  cold  years,”  had,  how-  , 
ever,  caused  some  uncertainty  as  to  the  adaptability  of  corn  to  the  New  Eng¬ 
land  climate.  Western  Massachusetts  reported  a  decline  in  the  raising  of  corn 
and  wheat,  because  the  high  prices  paid  for  wool  had  induced  farmers  to 
abandon  entirely  the  growing  of  grain  and  to  devote  their  attention  to  sheep¬ 
raising.5  In  Maine,  where  the  lumbering  and  ship-building  industries  fur¬ 
nished  a  good  market,  corn  production  was  increasing.  But  climatic  conditions 

1  N.  Y.  State  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions,  III  (1843),  p.  450. 

2  Ibid.,  II  (1842),  p.  140. 

3  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1852,  Agriculture,  195. 

4  Ibid.,  (1853),  p.  1 15. 

5  2d  Report,  Agriculture  of  Massachusetts  (1838),  p.  135. 


CORN 


341 


would  not  allow  the  Maine  farmer  to  rely  upon  corn  as  his  principal  source  of 
income.  In  eastern  Massachusetts  much  corn  was  grown  as  fodder  for  cattle 
in  the  late  summer  and  fall  when  the  pastures  were  low.  The  part  of  the 

Table  40. — Corn:  Production  in  the  United  States. 


[Source:  U.  S.  Censuses  of  1840,  1850,  and  i860.] 


Geographic  division 
and  State. 

1840. 

1850. 

i860. 

Total 

(1,000 

bu.) 

Per 

capita 

(bu.) 

Per 

cent  of 
U.  S. 
total. 

Total 

(1,000 

bu.) 

Per 

capita 

(bu.) 

Per 

cent  of 
U.  S. 
total. 

Total 

(1,000 

bu.) 

Per 

capita 

(bu.) 

Per 

cent  of 
U.  S. 
total. 

Jnited  States  . 

377,532 

22.1 

100.0 

592,071 

25.5 

100.0 

838,793 

26.7 

100.0 

Jeographic  Division : 

New  England  . 

6,993 

3-1 

1.9 

10,176 

3-7 

1-7 

9,165 

2.9 

1. 1 

Middle  Atlantic  . . . 

29,574 

6.5 

7-8 

46,453 

7.9 

7-8 

57,981 

7-8 

6.9 

East  North  Central. 

87,115 

29.8 

23.1 

177,320 

39-2 

29.9 

280,269 

40.5 

33-4 

West  North  Central 

18,739 

43-9 

5.0 

44  888 

5i-o 

7.6 

125,898 

58.0 

150 

Mountain  . 

7.7K 

5 . 1 

.  1 

800 

A  6 

T 

Pacific  . 

O/  J 

15 

.  I 

592 

I  'X 

T 

Mew  England : 

Maine  . 

951 

1.9 

•3 

1,750 

3-0 

•3 

1,546 

2.5 

.2 

New  Hampshire  . . . 

1,163 

4.1 

•3 

1,574 

4.9 

•3 

1,415 

4-3 

.2 

Vermont  . 

1,120 

3-8 

•3 

2,032 

6-5 

•3 

1,525 

4.8 

.2 

Massachusetts  . 

1,809 

2-5 

•5 

2,346 

2.4 

•  4 

2,157 

1.8 

•  3 

Rhode  Island  . 

450 

4.1 

.  I 

3.7 

.  1 

462 

2.6 

Connecticut  . 

1,500 

4  •  8 

•4 

i,935 

5-2 

•  3 

2,060 

4-5 

.2 

diddle  Atlantic: 

New  York  . 

10,972 

4-5 

2.9 

17,858 

5.8 

3-0 

20,o6l 

5-2 

2.4 

New  Jersey  . 

4,362 

11. 7 

1. 1 

8,760 

17.9 

1.5 

9,723 

14.5 

I .  I 

Pennsylvania  . 

14  240 

8-3 

3-8 

19,835 

8.6 

3-3 

28,197 

9-7 

3-4 

last  North  Central : 

Ohio  . 

33,668 

22.2 

8.9 

59,079 

29.8 

10. 0 

73,543 

31.4 

8.8 

Indiana  . 

28,156 

41. 1 

7-5 

52,964 

53-6 

8.9 

7L589 

53-0 

8.5 

Illinois  . 

22,634 

47-5 

6.0 

57,647 

67.7 

9-7 

H5,i75 

67-3 

13.7 

Michigan  . 

2,277 

10.7 

.6 

5,641 

14.2 

1.0 

12,445 

16.6 

i-5 

Wisconsin  . 

380 

12.3 

.  1 

1,989 

6.5 

•  3 

7,5U 

9-7 

•9 

Vest  North  Central: 

Minnesota  . 

17 

2  8 

2  0/12 

17  1 

A 

Iowa  . 

1,406 

32.6 

•4 

8,657 

45-o 

1-5 

42,411 

1/  .  1 

62.8 

•4 

5-0 

Missouri  . 

17,333 

45-2 

4.6 

36,214 

53-1 

6. 1 

72,892 

61.7 

8.7 

Dakota  Territory  . . 

20 

A  2 

Nebraska  . 

1 482 

ct  A 

ct 

Kansas  . 

6,151 

cj  A 

7 

dountain : 

0/  •  H 

•  / 

New  Mexico  . 

365 

5  Q 

x 

700 

7  6 

T 

Utah  . 

10 

d  •  y 

.  0 

/uy 

OT 

/  •  w 
2  2 

Nevada  . 

y L 

a 

Dacific : 

Washington  . 

e 

A 

Oregon  . 

.2 

D 

76 

•  H 

I  K 

California  . 

0 

12 

.  1 

5n 

1  •  k) 

T  'X 

T 

1  •  0 

4  Less  than  500  bushels. 


corn-stalks  above  the  ear,  “  when  early  cut  and  properly  cured/’  was  considered 
equal  in  feeding  value  to  timothy  and  other  hay.6  The  New  England  corn  crop 
of  1849,  as  reported  by  the  census  of  1850,  showed  a  substantial  increase 
over  that  of  1839,  and  was  in  fact  the  largest  ever  produced  by  that  group  of 


6U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1849,  Agriculture ,  223. 


342 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


States  on  any  census  year.  In  Maine  it  was  said  that  the  failui  e  of  the  wheat 
and  potato  crop  had  led  to  increased  planting  of  corn.7  In  Connecticut  the 
increased  use  of  lime  and  guano  was  said  to  have  stimulated  corn  production. 

MANAGEMENT  AND  HARVESTING  OF  CORN  IN  THE  EAST. 

A  common  rotation  consisted  of  oats  or  potatoes,  corn  or  oats,  wheat  or  rye, 
grass  until  “  bound  out,”  but  in  general  there  was  little  uniformity  in  cropping. 
Stable  manure  at  the  rate  of  20  to  40  cart  loads  to  the  acre  was  commonly 
applied.  It  was  a  disputed  question  whether  it  was  best  to  follow  the  old 
method  of  manuring  in  the  hill  or  to  spread  broadcast.  Both  methods  were 
in  common  use,  but  the  latter  was  said  to  be  increasing  in  favor.  For  the 
former  method  a  compost  of  muck  and  manure  was  commonly  regarded  as 
the  best.  On  farms  near  the  seashore,  fish  and  seaweeds  were  used.  In  Con¬ 
necticut,  guano  had  come  into  use,  and  in  this  State  even  more  care  was  given 
to  the  cultivation  of  the  corn  than  in  New  York.  Three  cultivations  and  two 
or  three  hand  hoeings  were  commonly  given.  A  handful  of  ashes,  lime,  or 
plaster  was  added  to  each  hill  at  the  time  of  the  first  hoeing.  Hilling  at  the  last 
hoeing  was  the  common  practice. 

Various  methods  of  harvesting  the  crop  were  practiced  in  the  East.  In 
New  York  and  Pennsylvania  the  common  method  was  to  cut  up  at  the  roots 
and  shock  in  the  fields  until  ready  for  husking.  In  New  England,  however, 
it  was  usual  to  top  the  corn,  cutting  off  the  stalks  a  few  inches  above  the  ear 
after  the  grain  had  reached  a  certain  stage  of  ripeness.  When  wilted,  the  tops 
were  bound  into  small  bundles  and  placed  in  shocks  to  cure.  The  corn  was 
left  to  ripen  on  the  butt  stalk,  and  when  sufficiently  dry  was  harvested,  either 
by  breaking  off  the  ears  with  the  husk  or  by  cutting  the  stalk  close  to  the 
ground.  Little  corn  was  sold,  but  the  object  was  to  raise  enough  for  consump¬ 
tion  on  the  farm. 

CORN  IN  KENTUCKY. 

The  limestone  area  of  Kentucky,  which  had  long  been  an  important  agri¬ 
cultural  center  of  the  West,  was  noted  for  com  and  livestock.  Corn,  alone, 
was  worth  more  than  all  other  crops  in  1840.  The  crop  rotation  was  more  or 
less  irregular.  Some  farmers  in  this  part  of  Kentucky  grew  corn  in  rotation 
with  wheat,  which  was  sown  among  the  standing  corn  in  the  autumn.  Seed¬ 
ing  down  to  clover  was  practiced  by  some  of  the  better  farmers,  but  the  culti¬ 
vating  of  corn  on  the  same  land,  year  after  year,  was  all  too  common.  The 
succession  of  corn  crop  was  sometimes  broken  by  seeding  to  bluegrass  and 
leaving  in  pasture  for  several  years.  The  prevailing  custom  of  feeding  corn 
and  fodder  to  cattle  grazing  upon  pasture,  much  of  which  was  woodland, 
led  to  the  exhaustion  of  the  soil  which  was  under  cultivation,  while  the 
woodland  received  the  manure.8 


PLANTING  AND  TILLAGE  METHODS. 

The  usual  method  of  planting  corn  in  Kentucky  was  to  lay  off  the  land 
into  squares  by  running  a  light  plow  across  the  field  both  ways.  The  corn 


7  Ibid.,  1851,  p.  135- 

8  Beatty,  Essays  on 


Practical  Agriculture,  XX,  64,  67. 


CORN 


343 


was  then  dropped  and  covered  with  a  hoe.  When  the  corn  was  4  or  5  inches 
high  it  was  the  common  practice  to  run  over  the  field  with  a  large  square 
harrow  from  which  a  few  teeth  had  been  removed.  Subsequent  cultivation 
included  from  two  to  six  cultivations  with  the  shovel-plow.9  One  hand-hoeing 
usually  followed  the  first  cultivation.  A  considerable  quantity  of  the  corn 
raised  in  the  bluegrass  region  was  fed  to  cattle  and  hogs,  though  a  large 
amount  was  also  sold  in  the  Cincinnati  market 10  whence  it  was  largely  shipped 
south  to  supply  the  plantation  trade.  Distilleries  consumed  a  considerable 
quantity.* 11 

IN  THE  MIAMI  AND  SCIOTO  VALLEYS  IN  OHIO. 

Ohio,  which  stood  fourth  among  the  States  in  the  production  of  corn  in 
1839,  was  first  in  1849.  The  State  was  renowned  for  the  great  extent  of  its 


Fig.  75. — 'Corn,  1849.  Each  dot  represents  300,000  bushels. 

During  the  forties  the  production  of  corn  considerably  increased  throughout  the 
northern  states.  In  the  West  corn  production  was  extending  north,  into  the  wheat  grow¬ 
ing  states  of  Michigan  and  Wisconsin,  and  west  along  the  Des  Moines  river  into  Iowa. 

rich  alluvial  land.  The  valleys  of  the  Miami  and  the  Scioto  ■were  regarded  as 
among  the  most  productive  corn-growing  regions  of  the  country.  As  wheat 
was  considered  the  staple  by  farmers  on  the  hilly  lands  of  eastern  Ohio,  so 
corn  was  the  chief  crop  with  the  farmers  who  cultivated  the  alluvial  soils. 
A  few  farmers  were  producing  corn  in  rotation,  but  it  was  the  common  prac¬ 
tice  in  this  section  for  corn  to  follow  corn  on  the  same  ground  year  after 

9  Ibid.,  88,  90. 

10  Beddall,  Blue  Grass  Region  of  Kentucky ,  98-100. 

11  Ohio  State  Board  of  Agriculture,  1st  Annual  Report  (1846),  p.  28. 


344 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


year.  It  was  said  in  1841  that  some  of  the  bottom  lands  on  the  Scioto  had 
been  cultivated  for  40  years  in  corn  without  rotation  or  rest,  and  that  they 
still  continued  to  produce  from  50  to  70  bushels  to  the  acre.  The  region  was 
thus  described  in  1851 : 12 

“  As  far  as  the  eye  can  stretch  in  the  distance,  nothing  but  corn  and  wheat  fields  are 
to  be  seen ;  and  on  some  points  in  the  Scioto  valley  as  high  as  a  thousand  acres  of ^  corn 
may  be  seen  in  adjoining  fields,  belonging  to  some  eight  or  ten  different  proprietors.” 

From  100  to  200  acres  of  corn  were  reported  to  be  frequently  grown  by 
rich  landed  proprietors.  One  Ross  County  farmer  was  said  to  have  1,800 
acres  exclusively  in  corn.13  The  relatively  large  yield,  the  small  amount  of 
labor  expended,  and  the  comparative  freedom  from  risk  all  combined  to  make 
the  corn  crop  a  favorite  among  those  possessing  alluvial  soils. 

GROWING  CORN  ON  WHEAT  FARMS  IN  EASTERN  OHIO. 

On  the  hill  farms  of  eastern  Ohio,  where  wheat  was  the  staple  crop,  the 
yield  of  corn  was  reported  to  be  much  less  than  on  the  bottom  lands  and  the 
cost  of  production  was  much  greater.14  Here  it  was  the  usual  practice  among 
wheat  farmers  to  grow  corn  or  oats  on  a  clover  sod,  to  be  succeeded  by  wheat, 
although  some  followed  the  corn  crop  with  a  summer  fallow  before  seeding 
the  wheat.  On  the  valley  lands  the  subsequent  culture  of  corn  consisted  of 
two  or  three  cultivations  with  the  shovel  plow  or  corn  plow,  for  the  hoe  was 
seldom  used.  Where  wheat  was  to  be  grown  in  the  midst  of  the  corn,  the 
latter  was  given  an  extra  cultivation  with  the  cultivator  or  shovel  plow.  As  in 
Kentucky,  occasionally  the  harrow  was  used  for  the  first  cultivation.15  Among 
the  wheat  farmers  of  eastern  Ohio,  on  the  other  hand,  it  was  usual  to  cultivate 
from  four  to  six  times,  running  two  or  three  times  through  the  row  at  each 
cultivation,  and  to  hand-hoe  once.  “  We  have  no  regular  system  of  rotation 
in  crops/’  wrote  a  farmer  from  this  region.  “  On  our  bottom  lands,  corn 
succeeds  corn  forever,  or  wheat  and  corn  alternately  forever,  without  any 
sensible  diminution  in  the  yield.”  16  Another  keen  observer  of  Ohio  agricul¬ 
ture  wrote : 17 

“There  are  many  things  to  admire  and  a  still  greater  number  to  deplore  in  the 
methods  of  cultivation  adopted  by  the  corn-growing  farmers  of  Ohio.  They  have  well 
learned  the  secret  of  extracting  from  the  soil,  its  fertilizing  properties.  This  they  do 
by  deep  plowing  and  by  frequently  working  the  corn  with  the  one  horse  plow,  or  shovel 
plow.  But  when  we  have  said  this  on  the  favorable  side,  but  little  more  can  be  added, 
unless  an  expose  be  made  of  the  wretched,  barbarous  systems  that  very  generally 
prevail.” 

Much  of  the  corn  raised  in  the  southern  part  of  Ohio  found  its  way  down 
the  Miami  and  Scioto  Rivers  to  Cincinnati,  which  was  the  corn  market  for 
the  region  comprising  southwestern  Ohio,  southeastern  Indiana,  and  north- 
central  Kentucky.  In  eastern  Ohio,  where  more  of  the  land  was  given  over 
to  wheat-growing  and  grazing,  the  corn  was  largely  fed  to  cattle  and  hogs. 

12  Cultivator,  new  series,  VIII  (1851),  p.  290. 
is  Ibid.,  VII  (1850),  p.  185. 

14  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1845,  p.  179.  . 

15  Cultivator,  new  seizes,  VI  (1849),  p.  90. 

is  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1852,  Agriculture,  252. 

17  Cultivator,  new  series,  VIII  (1851),  p.  291. 


CORN 


345 


CORN  AS  A  FIRST  CROP  ON  PRAIRIE  FARMS. 

West  of  Indiana,  up  to  1840,  the  open  prairies  of  Illinois,  Iowa,  and  Mis¬ 
souri,  which  were  later  to  become  the  most  productive  corn-producing  sections 
of  the  country,  had  been  generally  avoided.  The  valleys  of  the  Wabash,  the 
Illinois  and  the  Missouri  Rivers  were  still  the  centers  of  corn  production  in  the 
West.  (See  fig.  74.)  During  the  forties  the  corn  area  in  the  West  rapidly 
expanded,  pushing  northward  into  the  prairies  of  northern  Illinois  and  Indi¬ 
ana.  In  1850  with  the  exception  of  Michigan,  which  was  essentially  a  wheat¬ 
growing  section,  and  of  Wisconsin,  where  farmers  were  raising  little  else 
but  wheat,  corn  was  the  great  staple  in  the  States  west  of  Ohio. 

Corn  could  be  grown  with  success  on  a  newly-broken  prairie-sod  where  the 
wheat  crop  was  rarely  successful,  and  so  in  the  West  the  prairie  land  was  usu¬ 
ally  planted  to  corn  the  first  year.  The  immigrant  who  arrived  in  the  spring 
was  thus  able  with  but  little  care  or  expense  to  obtain  a  crop  of  corn  the  first 
year.  It  was  usual  to  turn  the  sod  the  latter  part  of  May  or  early  part  of  June 
to  the  depth  of  2  or  3  inches.  The  furrow-slice  was  laid  as  smoothly  as  pos¬ 
sible  to  prevent  the  grass  from  growing  up  through  the  seams,  and  in  every 
third  or  fourth  furrow  corn  was  dropped  to  be  covered  by  the  succeeding 
furrow  slice.  Another  method  was  to  pass  along  the  furrow-slice  with  an 
axe,  a  pointed  stick,  or  similar  instrument,  making  holes  at  intervals  in  the  sod, 
into  which  were  dropped  3  or  4  grains  of  corn.  The  holes  were  then  covered 
with  a  brush  of  the  foot. 

It  was  not  unusual  to  see  from  4  to  6  teams,  with  5  yoke  of  cattle  and  a  boy 
to  help  drive  at  each  plow,  breaking  up  the  sod.  Two  boys  followed  after  the 
teams,  dropping  the  corn,  which  was  covered  by  the  sod.  Between  and  2 
acres  of  corn  a  day  would  be  planted  in  this  way  by  a  man  with  4  or  5  yoke 
of  oxen.  The  first  crop  was  expected  to  pay  the  expense  of  breaking.  Yields 
ranged  15  to  45  bushels  an  acre,  but  most  of  the  reports  were  near  the  lower 
figure.18  One  writer  of  the  time  thus  described  the  method  of  planting: 19 

"  In  every  third  or  fourth  furrow  corn  is  dropped  at  the  outer  side  of  the  fur¬ 
row .  This  is  buried  up  by  the  succeeding  furrow,  and  the  corn  springs  up 

through  the  partial  crevice .  The  land  thus  ploughed  is  remarkably  free  from 

weeds,  and  the  corn  in  ordinary  seasons  grows  rapidly.  No  hoeing  is  needed,  and 
nothing  is  done  to  the  crop  until  the  time  of  gathering  arrives,  when  often  from  thirty 
to  sixty  bushels  of  good  corn  are  obtained.  The  cost  of  dropping  the  corn  is  ten  per 

cents  per  acre ;  one  small  boy  attends  three  ploughs .  If  the  sod  crop  is  put  in 

early,  it  can  be  cut  off  in  the  fall  in  sufficient  time  to  harrow  in  the  crop  of  wheat;  this 
is  done  without  any  further  plowing  and  gives  generally  the  largest  and  best  wheat 
crop  raised  on  the  land.” 

“No  manuring,  no  hoeing,  or  but  very  slight,”  wrote  another,20  “  no  har¬ 
vesting  in  many  cases,  that  being  attended  to  by  the  hogs . ” 

METHODS  OF  PLANTING  AND  CULTIVATING. 

On  stubble  ground  it  was  a  common  practice  to  list  the  land  for  corn.  A 
plow  passing  along  the  field  threw  up  a  furrow  and  returning  threw  up  an- 

18  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1852,  Agriculture,  201. 

19  Ibid.,  (1845),  p.  383. 

20  Cultivator,  X  (1843),  p.  81. 


346  AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 

other  against  the  first.  The  corn  was  then  planted  on  the  top  of  the  ridge. 
After  planting,  the  intervening  spaces  were  broken  up.  On  the  bottom  lands 
it  was  common  to  turn  two  furrows  together  and  leave  them  until  ready  to 
plant,  when  two  other  furrows  were  added,  forming  alternate  ridges  and 
valleys.  In  this  case  the  corn  was  planted  in  the  valleys.21  Remarks  one : 22 

“The  advantage  of  listing  is  that  it  enables  a  man  to  put  in  more  corn  than  in  the 
ordinary  way;  and  as  most  men  can  tend  more  corn  than  they  can  put  in,  this  is  con¬ 
sidered  a  gain .  Those  who  advocate  the  listing  practice  are  generally  energetic 

men,  having  new  ground.  In  the  hands  of  a  slow  man,  the  plan  is  likely  to  succeed 

poorly.” 

The  corn  was  dropped  by  hand.  Although  many  corn-planting  machines 
and  attachments  were  being  tried,  no  satisfactory  machine  had  yet  been  de¬ 
vised  which  would  plant  corn  in  hills,  and  planting  in  drills  was  not  considered 
satisfactory.  According  to  the  common  method  of  planting,  the  field  was 
furrowed  both  ways  with  a  small  plow,  and  the  corn,  having  been  dropped  at 
the  intersections,  was  covered  either  by  hand  or  with  a  harrow,  or  by  running 
a  bull-tongue  plow  along  the  edge  of  the  furrow,  thus  turning  the  earth  back 
over  the  seed.  Ingenious  farmers  had  their  own  contrivances  for  marking 
the  field  and  covering  the  seed. 

Corn  was  commonly  cultivated  two  or  three  times,  usually  with  a  shovel- 
plow,  often  with  the  one-horse  plow,  and  in  a  few  cases  with  a  steel-tooth 
cultivator.  In  Sangamon  County,  Illinois,  one  of  the  largest  corn-producing 
counties,  the  common  method  of  culture  was  thus  described : 23 

“When  the  corn  is  three  or  four  inches  high,  it  is  ploughed  with  a  small  plough, 
throwing  dirt  from  it.  In  eight  or  ten  days  it  is  cross-ploughed,  with  three  furrows 
in  a  row ;  and  in  ten  or  fifteen  days  repeat  the  operation  the  other  way,  and  so  make 
the  crop.” 

A  farmer  from  Macoupin  County  reported  that  it  was  his  practice  to  run 
a  light  2-horse  harrow,  from  which  the  front  tooth  had  been  removed,  straddle 
of  the  row  as  soon  as  the  corn  was  2  or  3  inches  high.  The  cultivator  then 
followed  twice  in  a  row,  then  the  bull-tongue  plow,  and  finally  the  cultivator 
again,  once  or  twice.24 

A  large  land  owner  of  Indiana,  H.  L.  Ellsworth,  reported  in  1855 : 25 

“I  have  been  able  to  hire  land,  tilled  with  a  crop  of  corn,  at  $2.50  to  $3-00  per  acre; 
the  average  yield  being  50  bushels.  The  cost  per  bushel,  standing  in  the  field,  is  about 
5  to  6  cents  only,  exclusive  of  the  rent  of  the  land.” 

An  occasional  farmer  applied  manure  to  his  land,  but  it  was  by  no  means  a 
common  practice.  A  correspondent  writes : 26 

“  But  little  attention  is  paid  to  saving  or  applying  manure ;  we  are  aware  of  its 
utility;  we  haul  it  to  our  fields  if  we  have  time;  the  low  price  of  lands  and  the  high 
price  of  labor  will  not  warrant  the  operation  in  all  cases.” 


21  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1852,  Agriculture,  291. 

22  Ibid.,  292. 

23  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1850,  Agriculture,  20. 

24  Prairie  Farmer,  XI  (1851),  p.  222. 

25  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1845,  p.  385. 

26  Ibid.,  1852,  Agriculture,  278. 


CORN 


347 


DIFFICULTIES  OF  GROWING  CORN  ON  THE  PRAIRIES. 

Some  of  the  many  difficulties  encountered  by  the  corn-grower  on  the 
prairies  were  described  as  follows  by  a  writer  from  Cook  County,  Illinois,  in 
1851 : 27 

The  general  complaint  is  that  it  often  fails  to  come  up  when  planted,  and  should 
it  happen  to  come  up  the  black  birds,  crows,  cranes,  and  squirrels,  or  some  other 
depredators,  come  to  claim  their  share ;  and  in  a  dry  season  it  will  dry  up,  and  in  a  wet 
season  it  is  drowned  out,’  and,  should  there  be  by  chance  any  left  to  grow  the  frost 
often  comes  in  the  fall  before  it  is  ripe  and  destroys  it,  so  they  are  only  sure  of  a 
small  crop;  and  the  consequence  is,  the  country  is  condemned  as  not  being  fit  for  raising 
corn,  when  in  most  cases  the  fault  is  in  the  cultivator,  and  not  in  the  climate  or  soil.” 

The  gophers  in  Wisconsin  28  and  the  black  birds  and  squirrels  in  Illinois 
were  constant  menaces.  Many  northern  farmers,  following  the  advice  of 
southern  correspondents  in  the  agricultural  journals,  planted  their  corn  shal¬ 
low.  Then,  losing  their  first  crop  by  frost,  which  penetrated  to  the  kernel  and 
killed  the  crop,  they  declared  that  book  farming  got  them  into  trouble.29 

HARVESTING  PRACTICES. 

The  method  of  harvesting  varied.  In  Kentucky,  the  corn  was  cut  and  put 
in  shocks  containing  144  hills.  In  the  wheat  region  of  Ohio,  after  the  corn 
had  been  cut  by  hand  and  set  in  shocks  ready  for  husking,  the  ground  was 
plowed  and  seeded  to  wheat.  A  few  farmers  followed  the  New  England  cus¬ 
tom  of  topping  the  corn.30  In  the  “  corn  belt  ”  of  the  West  the  ears  were 
pulled  from  the  stalks  and  comparatively  little  corn  was  cut.  In  livestock 
sections  the  farmers  generally  fed  the  corn  on  the  ground,  and  thus  avoided 
the  labor  of  cutting  up,  husking,  and  cribbing. 

THE  DECADE  1850  TO  1860. 

The  corn  crop  of  1859  was  40  per  cent  greater  than  that  of  1849.  (See 
%•  76,  p.  348.)  The  New  England  States,  with  the  exception  of  Con¬ 
necticut,  showed  a  decrease  in  production,  New  York  showed  a  small  in¬ 
crease.  From  Pennsylvania  westward  to  Indiana  the  increase  had  been 
general.  Farther  west  the  gain  in  production  had  been  more  rapid,  particu¬ 
larly  in  Illinois,  Iowa,  and  Missouri.  In  Kansas  and  Nebraska,  considerable 
corn  was  produced  in  1859  along  the  Mississippi  and  Kansas  Rivers.  In 
Wisconsin  corn  production  was  slowly  increasing.  In  1840  the  leading  corn- 
producing  States  of  the  Union  had  been  Tennessee,  Kentucky,  and  Virginia, 
in  the  order  named.  By  i860  the  leading  states  were  Illinois,  Ohio,  and  Mis¬ 
souri.  Thus  was  the  center  of  corn  production  moving  westward.  In  1839 
the  northern  States,  exclusive  of  the  border  States,  had  produced  31  per  cent 
of  the  total  corn  crop;  in  1859  they  produced  47  per  cent  of  the  total. 

In  New  England,  the  census  report  shows  a  decline  in  corn  production  dur¬ 
ing  the  fifties.  While  the  New  England  farmer  estimated  his  cost  of  corn 

27  Prairie  Farmer ,  XI  (1851),  p.  183. 

28  Ibid.,  IV  (1844),  P-  67. 

20  Ibid.,  VIII  (1848),  p.  152. 

80  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1851,  Agriculture,  375. 


348 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


production  at  from  40  to  50  cents  a  bushel,  the  Illinois  fanner  generally  esti¬ 
mated  his  cost  at  from  12  to  16  cents ;  a  difference  in  cost  which  was  begin¬ 
ning  to  be  felt  by  the  former.  A  Massachusetts  writer  in  1849  reported : 31 

“  Some  are  of  the  opinion  that,  with  the  present  high  cost  of  labor  and  manure,  we 
cannot  compete  with  western  farmers  in  raising  corn;  that,  with  the  increased 
facilities  for  transportation,  we  shall  soon  be  run  off  the  track;  that  we  had  better  buy 

our  corn,  than  raise  it . Taking  the  average  price  of  corn,  for  the  last  six  years, 

we  may  safely  estimate  that  a  bushel  of  corn  is  worth  forty  cents.  I  am  aware  that  it 
usually  costs  nearly  this  sum  to  raise  corn;  but  then  it  is  one  of  the  best  preparatory 
crops  for  all  others,  and  the  fodder  is  of  much  value.  The  corn  crop  possesses  some 

advantages  over  most  other  crops .  The  main  object  of  most  farmers,  in 

cultivating  their  land  is  to  prepare  it  to  produce  more  grass.” 


Fig.  76. — Corn,  1859.  Each  dot  represents  300,000  bushels. 

During  the  fifties  the  area  of  corn  production  was  pushed  rapidly  westward. 

Its  production  was  rapidly  increasing  on  the  prairies.  In  New  England  corn  grow¬ 
ing  was  declining. 

There  was  a  tendency  to  seed  more  acres  in  oats  and  less  in  corn.  Important 
changes  in  methods  of  cultivation  were  the  increasing  use  of  machinery  and 
manure.  The  New  England  farmer  was  exerting  every  means  to  increase  his 
supply  of  manure.  In  addition,  muck,  guano,  lime,  superphosphate  of  lime,  and 
ashes  were  widely  used  on  corn  land.  Com  planters  had  not  yet  come  into 
general  use,  but  the  horse-hoe,  or  cultivator,  was  used  upon  most  farms.32 
From  Rhode  Island  it  was  reported  that  the  introduction  of  the  planter  and 
cultivator  was  leading  to  a  closer  planting  of  corn.  Whereas  formerly  it  was 
planted  3^  feet  each  way,  it  was  now  planted  in  rows  3  feet  apart  and  from 
2  to  2.\  feet  apart  in  the  rows.33  In  Maryland,  Delaware,  New  Jersey,  and 
eastern  Pennsylvania  the  use  of  guano,  lime,  and  superphosphate  was  rapidly 

31 Massachusetts ,  Returns  of  the  Agricultural  Societies  (1849),  P-  II^- 

32  Maine  Board  of  Agriculture,  5th  Annual  Report  (i860),  p.  176. 

33  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1855,  Agriculture,  180. 


CORN 


349 


increasing.  In  Kentucky  the  cropping  system,  which  was  well  established 
prior  to  1840,  remained  unchanged;  corn  production  had  increased  but  little 
since  i860. 

In  the  prairie  region,  the  corn  area  increased  with  the  expansion  of  settle¬ 
ment  into  what  is  now  known  as  the  Corn  Belt  of  the  United  States.  Com¬ 
paratively  little  corn  was  sold ;  it  was  marketed  mostly  in  the  form  of  cattle 
and  hogs.  It  is  for  this  reason  that,  although  Ohio,  Kentucky,  Indiana,  Illinois, 
Iowa,  and  Missouri  were  producing  from  5  to  18  bushels  of  corn  to  every 
bushel  of  wheat,  the  marketing  of  wheat  attracted  more  attention  than  that  of 
corn.  In  the  Western  States,  with  the  exception  of  Wisconsin  and  Michigan, 
corn  was  the  great  staple  during  the  period  from  1840  to  i860.  The  spring- 
wheat  region  of  the  Northwest  had  not  yet  been  settled.  As  in  the  East,  the 
principal  changes  in  methods  of  production  during  the  decade  were  the  adop¬ 
tion  of  improved  planting  and  cultivating  machinery. 


Chapter  XXVIII. — The  Minor  Cereals. 

OATS. 


Production  of  oats  was  rather  generally  distributed  over  the  agricultural 
area  of  the  North  in  1840.  In  New  York,  Pennsylvania,  and  New  England 
more  oats  were  raised  than  corn.  In  the  general  farming  regions  of  eastern 
Ohio,  oats  were  a  leading  crop  in  the  field  system ;  west  of  Ohio  oats  were  a 
relatively  unimportant  crop.  New  York,  Pennsylvania,  and  Ohio,  in  the 
order  named,  raised  the  largest  crops  of  oats  in  1839,  when  they  produced 
over  45  per  cent  of  the  United  States  total.  (See  fig.  77.)  Oats  were  largely 
raised  for  farm  consumption  rather  than  for  sale. 


•  .  !t 


Fig.  77. — Oats,  1839.  Each  dot  represents  200,000  bushels. 

Oats  were  quite  generally  grown  throughout  the  agricultural  area  of 
the  North.  They  were  largely  fed  on  the  farm. 

IN  NEW  ENGLAND  AND  NEW  YORK. 


t 


The  New  England  crop  rotation  usually  included  one  or  two  crops  of  oats. 
They  were  sometimes  sown  as  the  first  crop  in  the  rotation,  sometimes  after 
corn  or  potatoes.  Often  oats  was  the  last  crop,  before  the  land  was  laid  down 
to  grass,  the  seed  having  been  sown  among  the  oats.1  In  the  three  northern 
New  England  States  oats  were  regarded  with  more  favor  than  in  the  three 
southern  States,  where  corn  could  be  grown  to  better  advantage.  In  New 
York  the  production  of  oats  was  general.  They  were  usually  grown  in  rota¬ 
tion  with  other  crops,  frequently  as  a  second  crop  in  the  rotation.2  It  was 
reported  in  1849: 

“  In  most  parts  of  western  New  York  oats  are  a  secondary  crop  in  importance,  and 
are  merely  grown  for  home  consumption.  But  in  some  counties  where  wheat  is  not 

1  2d  Report,  Agriculture  of  Massachusetts  (1838),  p.  17. 

2  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1849,  Agriculture,  288. 


350 


THE  MINOR  CEREALS 


351 


raised  oats  are  a  prominent  crop . The  yield  under  good  culture  and  on  rich  land 

varies  from  sixty  to  one  hundred  bushels .  They  are  generally  grown  on  poor 

lands  and  in  a  slovenly  manner  and  in  such  cases  produce  about  thirty  bushels.” 


Table  41. — Oats:  Production  in  the  United  States. 


[Source:  U.  S.  censuses,  1840,  1850,  and  i860.] 


Geographic  division  and 
State. 

1840. 

1850. 

j  Total 
(1,000 
bu.) 

Per 

cap¬ 

ita 

(bu.) 

Per 
cent  of 
U.  S. 
total. 

Total 

(1,000 

bu.) 

Per 

cap¬ 

ita 

(bu.) 

Per 

cent  of 
U.  S. 
total. 

Inited  States . 

ieographic  Division : 

New  England  . 

Middle  Atlantic  . . . 
East  North  Central. 
West  North  Central 
Mountain  . 

123,0/1 

7,540 

44,401 

27,883 

2,451 

7-2 

3-4 

9-8 

9-5 

5-7 

100.0 

6.0 

36.1 

22.7 

2.0 

146,584 

8,101 

51,469 

35,496 

6833 

11 

61 

2,181 

973 

2,308 

1,165 

215 

1,259 

26,553 

3,378 

21,538 

13,473 

5,655 

10,087 

2,866 

3,415 

3i 

1,524 

5278 

6- 3 

3-0 

8.7 

7.8 

7- 8 

1.0 

3-7 

3-o 

7-3 

1. 1 
i-5 
3-4 

8.6 

6.9 
9-3 

6.8 

5-7 
11. 8 

7.2 
11. 2 

5-0 

7-9 

7-7 

100.0 

5-5 

35-1 

24.2 

4-7 

•  «•••• 

Pacific  . 

few  England : 

Maine  . 

New  Hampshire  . . . 

Vermont  . 

Massachusetts  . 

Rhode  Island  . 

Connecticut  . 

[iddle  Atlantic: 

New  York . 

New  Jersey  . 

Pennsylvania  . 

ast  North  Central  : 

Ohio  . 

Indiana  . 

Illinois  . 

Michigan  . 

Wisconsin  . 

Zest  North  Central : 
Minnesota  . 

1,076 

1,296 

2,223 

1,320 

1 72 
1453 

20,676 

3,083 

20,642 

14,393 

5,982 

4,988 

2,114 

406 

2. 1 
4-6 

7.6 
1.8 

1.6 
4-7 

8-5 

8- 3 
12.0 

9- 4 

8.7 
10.5 

10. 0 
13 -i 

•9 

1.0 

1.8 

1. 1 

.  1 

1.2 

16.8 

2.5 

16.8 

11. 7 

4.9 
4.1 
i.7 

•  3 

1-5 
•7 
1.6 
.8 
.  1 
.8 

18. 1 

2.3 

14.7 

9.2 

3-9 

6.9 

1.9 

2.3 

Iowa  . 

Missouri  . 

Dakota  Territory  .. 

216 

2,235 

5-0 

5-8 

.2 

1.8 

1. 1 
3-6 

Nebraska  . 

Kansas  . 

fountain : 

New  Mexico  . 

Utah  . 

11 

1 .0 

Nevada  . 

acific : 

Washington  . 

Oregon  . 

61 

A  6 

California  . 

4  •  ^ 

| 

i860  . 


Total 

(1,000 

bu.) 


Per 

cap¬ 

ita 

(bu.) 


172,643 

5-5 

10,895 

3-5 

67,101 

9.0 

5T043 

7-4 

11,910 

5-5 

72 

•  •  •  • 

2,063 

4-6 

2,989 

4-8 

1,329 

4.0 

3,630 

11. 5 

1,180 

1.0 

245 

1.4 

1,522 

3-3 

35T75 

9.i 

4,539 

6.8 

27,387 

9-4 

15,409 

6.6 

5,3i8 

39 

15,220 

8.9 

4,037 

5-4 

n,059 

14.2 

2,176 

12.6 

5,888 

8.7 

3,681 

31 

3 

1.0 

74 

2.6 

88 

1.0 

8 

63 

1.6 

1 

%  •  •  •  • 

134 

11. 6 

886 

16.9 

1,043 

2.7 

Per 

cent  of 
U.  S. 
total1. 


100.0 

6.3 
38.9 
29.6 
6.9 
•  •  •  •  • 
1.2 


1-7 

.8 

2.1 

•  7 
.  1 

•  9 

20.4 

2.6 

15-9 

8.9 

3-1 

8.8 

2.4 

6.4 

1-3 

3-4 

2.1 


.  1 


.  1 

•5 

.6 


In  Erie  County  oats  were  often  the  main  crop  on  farms  having  shale  land. 
Many  farmers  were  said  to  have  “cleared  and  paid  for  their  farms,  built 
good  houses  and  barns  and  surrounded  themselves  with  the  reasonable  com¬ 
forts  of  life  by  means  of  the  oat  crop.”  3  In  the  Hudson  Valley  in  eastern 


3  N.  Y.  State  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions  (1843),  p.  440. 


352  AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 

New  York,  where  a  rotation  having  but  little  wheat  was  commonly  practiced, 
oats  were  the  leading  grain  crop.  In  Dutchess  County,  the  leading  oat- 
producing  county  in  the  state,  a  rotation  of  corn,  roots,  oats,  and  grass  was 
reported.4  In  Orange  County,  the  best  crop  of  oats  offered  for  premium  to 
the  agricultural  society  in  1844  yielded  108  bushels  to  the  acre;  the  second 
best  74  bushels.5  In  New  Jersey  farmers  were  said  to  be  sowing  more  oats 
and  buckwheat  and  having  less  corn  and  fallow.6 

The  census  of  1850  showed  a  relatively  small  increase  in  oat  production — 
from  123,000,000  bushels  in  1839  to  146,000,000  bushels.  Maine  and  New 
York  were  the  States  of  greatest  increase  in  the  East,  and  Illinois,  Wisconsin, 
Iowa,  and  Missouri  in  the  West.  (See  figs.  77  and  78.) 

In  Maine,  the  production  of  oats  was  said  to  have  become  decidedly  greater 
because  of  the  failure  of  potatoes  and  wheat.7  A  correspondent  reported  in 


Fig.  78. — Oats,  1849.  Each  dot  represents  200,000  bushels. 


On  prairie  farms  oats  were  a  usual  crop,  but  they  did  not  occupy  such 
a  prominent  place  as  wheat  or  corn. 

1844: 8  “This  grain  is  extensively  cultivated.  Large  quantities  are  used  in 
the  logging  swamps,  on  stage  routes,  in  stables,  and  a  great  amount  is  shipped.” 
Another  correspondent  from  Somerset  County  reported  9  in  1851  that  “A 
mixed  crop  of  oats  and  peas  is  raised  here  in  large  quantities ;  and  used  for 
making  pork,  beef  and  provender  for  teams  lumbering.”  In  New  York  and 
Pennsylvania  it  was  said  in  1850  that  oats  were  taking  the  place  formerly 
occupied  by  the  summer  fallow.10 


4  Cultivator,  new  series,  I  (1844),  p.  107. 

5  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Reports  1844,  p.  50;  1849,  p.  288. 

6  Cultivator,  X  (1843),  P-  XI3- 

7  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Reports  1848,  Agriculture,  55*1  1844,  P*  49  J  1848,  p.  3431 

1851,  p.  135. 

8  Ibid.,  1844,  p.  49. 

9  Ibid.,  1851,  p.  135* 

10  U.  S.  Census  of  i860,  Agriculture,  p.  lxvii. 


THE  MINOR  CEREALS 


353 


In  Maryland  and  Delaware  the  census  of  1850  reported  a  considerable  de¬ 
cline  in  oat  production  during  the  previous  decade.  Oats  had  thrived  on  the 
depleted  soils,  but  with  increased  attention  to  rotation  and  fertilization  many 
farmers  were  endeavoring  to  substitute  wheat,  corn,  or  potatoes  for  oats,  in 
the  hope  of  thereby  securing  greater  profits.11  In  Ohio,  the  culture  of  the 
oat  crop  was  said  to  be  growing  unpopular  among  the  best  farmers,  who 
believed  that  oats  impoverished  the  land  more  than  corn.12  In  the  corn  region 
of  the  West  oats  were  regarded  with  little  favor.  One  great  difficulty  with 
the  crop  was  the  tendency  to  lodge  when  planted  on  rich  prairie  soils  or  on 
the  fertile  bottomlands.13  In  the  wheat  region  poor  crops  from  1847  to  1853 

were  leading  to  increased  attention  to  a  rotation  in  which  oats  had  an  important 
place. 


Fig.  79. — Oats,  1859.  Each  dot  represents  200,000  bushels. 


In  the  West  the  wheat  farms  of  Wisconsin  and  Illinois  also  grew  many 
oats.  There  was  no  large  area  in  which  the  production  of  oats  was 
concentrated. 


Oats  were  harvested  and  threshed  in  much  the  same  way  as  wheat.  Inas¬ 
much  as  they  were  commonly  grown  in  small  quantities,  they  were  more 
frequently  cut  with  the  cradle  and  threshed  with  the  flail. 


RYE. 

In  1840,  eastern  Pennsylvania,  eastern  New  York,  and  New  Jersey  com¬ 
prised  the  leading  rye-producing  sections  of  the  country.  Pennsylvania  alone 
produced  one-third  of  the  total  rye  crop  of  the  country,  and  with  New  York 
over  one-half  of  the  total.  New  Jersey  ranked  third,  Virginia  fourth,  Ken¬ 
tucky  fifth,  and  Ohio  sixth.  West  of  Ohio  very  little  rye  was  grown.  In  the 
southern  New  England  States  rye  was  more  commonly  grown  than  wheat.14 
(See  figs.  80  and  81.) 


11  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1852,  Agriculture,  p.  176;  1849,  p.  115. 

12  Ibid.,  1852,  p.  258. 

13  Ibid.,  1852,  p.  343;  1849,  p.  181. 

14  Ibid.,  1847,  p.  124. 


24 


354 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 

In  1849  it  was  apparent  that  the  national  production  of  rye  had  declined. 
For  that  year  all  of  the  northern  States  as  far  west  as  Indiana,  with  the 
exception  of  New  York,  reported  a  lower  total  production  than  for  1839.  Es¬ 
pecially  noticeable  was  the  decline  of  eastern  Pennsylvania,  New  Jersey,  and 
Maryland,  where  rye  production  had  formerly  been  concentrated.15  In  this 
section  rye  was  usually  grown  in  small  fields  on  the  poorer  soils,  and  was  fre 
quently  substituted  for  wheat  after  that  crop  ceased  to  thrive.  But  with  the 
introduction  of  new  varieties  of  wheat,  and  with  the  improvement  of  eastern 
soils,  wheat  recovered  some  of  its  popularity  and  the  culture  of  rye  declined. 

In  New  England,  rye  was  said  to  be  cultivated  by  only  few  farmers  and 
chiefly  on  wornout  pasture  land  or  on  newly  cleared  land.17  From  Vermont  it 

was  reported : 18 


Rye  was  extensively  grown  in  the  North  Atlantic  states  where 
wheat  had  been  yielding  poor  crops.  Eastern  Pennsylvania,  New.  Jersey 
and  the  Hudson  valley  region  of  New  York  constituted  the  principal  rye 
producing  region. 

“  Rye  has  considerably  diminished  within  the  last  twenty  years,  as  it  is  not  now  con¬ 
sidered  so  important  an  article  for  family  consumption  since  western  flour  has  become 
cheaper  and  a  common  article  of  consumption  and  a  necessity  in  most  families;  and  the 
praiseworthy  and  philanthropic  spirit  of  the  age  having  banished  the  spirits  former  y 
extracted  from  this  grain,  it  is  no  longer  cultivated  as  a  source  of  profit . 

But  Rensselaer  County,  New  York,  one  of  the  leading  rye-growing  coun- 
ties,  reported  in  1833 : 19  “  Large  quantities  of  rye  are  cultivated  in  this 
county,  for  the  Baltimore  market,  where  it  is  mostly  distilled.  It  is  one  of  the 
most  profitable  crops  we  raise.” 

In  eastern  Pennsylvania,  New  Jersey,  and  Maryland  the  decline  in  rye 
production  was  ascribed  by  many  to  frequent  attacks  of  rust,  the  improvement 

15  U.  S.  Census  of  i860 ,  Agriculture,  p.  lx. 

16  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1849,  Agriculture,  123. 

17  Ibid.,  1850,  Agriculture,  p.  270;  1852,  p.  126. 

18  Ibid.,  1849,  pp.  86,  91. 

19  Ibid.,  (1853,  Agriculture),  p.  155- 


THE  MINOR  CEREALS 


355 


of  farming  methods,  the  introduction  of  Mediterranean  wheat,  and  the  conse¬ 
quent  increase  in  the  wheat  yield.20  In  Harford  County,  Maryland,  the  rye 
crop  was  said  to  have  been  abandoned,  because  of  failure  for  the  past  few 


Table  42. — Rye:  Production  in  the  United  States. 


[Source:  U.  S.  censuses  of  1840,  1850  and  i860.] 


Geographic  division  and 
State. 

1840. 

1850. 

i860. 

Total 

(1,000 

bu.) 

Per 

1,000 

popula¬ 

tion 

(bu.) 

Per 

cent  of 
U.  S. 
total. 

Total 
( 1 ,000 
bu.) 

Per 

1,000 

popula¬ 

tion 

(bu.) 

Per 

cent  of 
U.  S. 
total. 

Total 

(1.000 

bu.) 

Per 

1,000 

popula¬ 

tion 

(bu.) 

lited  States  . 

18,646 

1,092 

100.0 

14,189 

6l2 

100.0 

21,101 

671 

:ographic  Division : 

New  England  . 

1,985 

888 

10.6 

1,571 

576 

II. I 

1,426 

455 

Middle  Atlantic  . . . 

H,259 

2,487 

60.4 

10,209 

1,731 

72.0 

II. 701 

1,569 

East  North  Central. 

1,068 

365 

5-7 

775 

171 

5-5 

3,501 

505 

West  North  Central 

72 

170 

•  4 

63 

72 

•4 

605 

279 

Mountain  . 

n 

-a 

T  9 

Pacific  . 

a 

O 

I 

55 

1 Z 

TO  A 

iw  England : 

Maine  . 

138 

275 

•  7 

103 

1 76 

•  7 

124 

196 

New  Hampshire  . . . 

308 

1,083 

1-7 

183 

576 

i-3 

128 

393 

Vermont  . 

231 

791 

1.2 

176 

561 

i-3 

139 

442 

Massachusetts  . 

536 

727 

2.9 

481 

484 

3.4 

388 

3i5 

.^hode  Island  . 

35 

3i7 

.2 

27 

179 

.2 

28 

162 

Tonnecticut  . 

737 

2,379 

3-9 

601 

1,621 

4.2 

619 

L345 

ddle  Atlantic : 

New  York  . 

2,979 

1,227 

16.0 

4,148 

i  339 

29.2 

4,787 

1,234 

New  Jersey  . 

1,666 

4,462 

8.9 

1,256 

2,565 

8.9 

L439 

2,142 

3ennsylvania  . 

6,614 

3,836 

35-5 

4,805 

2,079 

33-9 

5  475 

1,884 

st  North  Central : 

)hio  . 

814 

536 

4-3 

426 

215 

3-0 

684 

292 

ndiana  . 

130 

189 

•  7 

79 

80 

.6 

463 

343 

llinois  . 

88 

185 

•5 

83 

98 

.6 

95i 

556 

lichigan  . 

34 

161 

.2 

106 

266 

.7 

5i4 

686 

Visconsin  . 

2 

63 

81 

266 

.6 

889 

i,i45 

ist  North  Central : 

Minnesota  . 

a 

21 

TOT 

•7  r\f\ 

owa  . 

4. 

88 

IQ 

q8 

T 

T8a 

OO  T 

Missouri  . 

68 

179 

•  4 

44 

65 

•3 

10  0 
293 

z7 1 
248 

)akota  Territory  . . 

T 

T  AC 

Nebraska  . 

■a 

14o 

87 

Kansas  . 

O 

A 

°/ 

36 

n 

•untain : 

*ew  Mexico  . 

T 

T  A 

Jtah  . 

a 

18 

T 

A4 

19 

T  A 

levada  . 

a 

:ific : 

A4 

Vashington  . 

a 

TO 

'regon  . 

a 

8 

0 

52 

137 

alifornia  . 

0 

52 

Less  than  500  bushels 


Per 

cent  of 
U.  S. 
total. 


100.0 

6.8 

55-5 

16.6 

2.9 


•3 


I 

2. 


22. 

6. 

26. 


3- 

2. 

4. 

2. 

4- 


1. 


•3 


years.21  From  Burlington,  New  Jersey,  it  was  reported  22  that  the  rye  crop 
had  “  disappeared  rapidly  from  the  fields  since  the  introduction  of  Mediter- 


20  Ibid.,  1849,  p.  123. 
n  Ibid.,  1851,  Agriculture ,  p.  267. 
22  Ibid.,  1850,  p.  202. 


4*  O  ON  O  00  vj  vo  h\qvj  on  On 


356 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


ranean  wheat,  which  succeeds  admirably  on  light  sandy  soils,  yielding  fifty 
per  cent  more  in  quantity  than  rye,  and  commanding  thirty-three  per  cent 

more  in  price.” 

In  the  West,  rye  was  largely  used  as  a  fall  or  spring  pasture  for  livestock. 
It  was  frequently  sown  in  the  midst  of  corn  at  the  last  cultivation  and  “  hog¬ 
ged  down  to  the  ground,”  in  the  fall.23  In  Ross  County,  Ohio,  in  1848,  its 
cultivation  was  reported  to  have  been  almost  abandoned  by  the  farmers  in 
consequence  of  repeated  failures  since  1840,  the  cause  of  which  was  reported 
to  be  as  much  a  mystery  as  the  potato  rot.24  In  Wisconsin  its  culture  was 
reported  to  be  chiefly  confined  to  the  German  settlers.25 

By  1859,  the  production  of  rye  showed  considerable  increase.  In  New 
England  there  had  been  a  small  decrease,  which  was  more  than  offset  by  the 


Fig.  81.— Rye,  1859.  Each  dot  represents  25,000  bushels. 


The  area  in  rye  increased  but  little  from  1840  to  i860.  The  increase 
was  mainly  in  the  West  where  rye  was  only  an  occasional  crop. 

general  increase  in  the  West.  West  of  Ohio  the  increase  had  been  large, 
especially  in  Illinois  and  Wisconsin,  each  of  which  was  reported  to  have 
raised  about  900,000  bushels  in  i859*26  (See  fig.  81.) 


BARLEY. 

The  relative  importance  of  barley  and  oats  in  the  United  States  in  i839> 
expressed  in  bushels,  was  as  1  is  to  30.  Barley  was  the  least  important  of  the 
cereals.  More  than  half  of  the  crop  was  produced  in  New  York.  The  barley 
crop  increased  fourfold  during  the  20  years  from  1840  to  i860,  or  from 
4  161  too  bushels  to  15,826,000  bushels.  The  States  contributing  most  to  the 
increase  were  California,  Ohio,  Illinois,  and  Wisconsin.  Important  increases 

23  Ibid.,  1852,  Agriculture,  pp.  262,  295. 

24  Ohio  State  Board  of  Agric.  3d  Annual  Report  (1848),  p.  103. 

25  Prairie  Farmer,  VIII  (1848),  p.  35. 

26  U.  S.  Census  of  i860,  Agriculture,  pp.  lx,  lxii. 


THE  MINOR  CEREALS 


357 


occurred  also  in  New  York,  Maine,  and  Pennsylvania.  A  large  part  of  the 
increase  came  from  new  territory ;  nevertheless,  owing  to  difficulties  in  wheat¬ 
growing  in  the  East,  barley  gained  in  most  of  the  eastern  States.27  In  western 


STATE  BUS. 
N.Y.  2.320.066 
Me.  353.161 
Ohio  H  2.4*0 
Pa.  209.693 
Plan.  /  6  5.3!  9 
Mich.  127.602 


STATC  BUS. 
N.H.  121699 
Va.  67.430 

III.  62.251 

Ft.  /.  66.4  90 

Other  212.751 

U  S.  4,161.504 


Fig.  82. — Barley,  1839.  Each  dot  represents  100,000  bushels. 

Over  one-half  the  total  barley  crop  of  the  country  was  grown  in  New 
York.  In  the  Mohawk  Valley  barley  was  taking  the  place  of  wheat. 


Fig.  83. — Barley,  1859.  Each  dot  represents  100,000  bushels. 

During  the  fifties  California  developed  as  a  leading  barley  growing 
center.  It  was  not  a  prominent  crop  in  the  Mississippi  Valley  except  in 
the  vicinity  of  Cincinnati,  Ohio. 

New  York  barley  was  often  substituted  for  wheat  after  the  advent  of  the 
wheat-midge.28 

27  Maine  Board  of  Agric.  5th  Annual  Report  (i860),  Secretary’s  Report ,  180. 

28  Country  Gentleman  (1859),  XIII,  41. 


358 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


The  increased  immigration  from  Europe  during  the  fifties  was  thought  to 
have  stimulated  barley  production  in  America.  To  quote  from  the  census 
report  for  i860 : 29 

“  Barley  is  now  used  in  this  country  principally  for  beer-making  purposes.  With  the 
rapid  increase  in  our  foreign  population  there  is  yearly  an  increased  demand  for  barley, 
and  the  price  has  advanced  much  more  than  that  of  any  other  of  our  ordinary  grain 
crops.  Weight  for  weight,  barley  of  late  years  has  brought  a  much  higher  price  than 
wheat,  and,  where  the  soil  and  climate  are  well  suited  to  its  production,  there  are  few 
crops  more  profitable.” 


Table  43. — Barley:  Production  in  the  United  States. 

[Source:  U.  S.  censuses  of  1840,  1850  and  i860.] 


Geographic  division 
and  State. 

1840. 

1850. 

i860. 

Total 

(1,000 

bu.) 

Per 

1,000 

popula¬ 

tion 

(bu.) 

Per 

cent  of 
U.  S. 
total. 

Total 

(1,000 

bu.) 

Per 

1,000 

popula¬ 

tion 

(bu.) 

Per 

cent  of 
U.  S. 
total. 

Total 

(1,000 

bu.) 

Per 

1,000 

popula¬ 

tion 

(bu.) 

Per 

cent  of 
U.  S. 
total. 

United  States  . 

4,162 

244 

100.0 

5,167 

223 

100.0 

15,826 

503 

100.0 

Geographic  Division : 

New  England . 

797 

357 

19.2 

414 

152 

8.0 

1,199 

382 

7.6 

Middle  Atlantic  . . . 

2,742 

606 

65.9 

3,757 

637 

72.7 

4,742 

636 

30.0 

East  North  Central. . 

462 

158 

II .  I 

796 

176 

15-4 

4,098 

592 

25.9 

West  North  Central 

II 

25 

.3 

36 

41 

•  7 

8ll 

374 

5-i 

TMVmntain 

2 

25 

18 

IOI 

.1 

Pacific  . . 

10 

92 

.2 

4446 

10,013 

28.1 

New  England : 

Maine  . 

355 

708 

8.6 

152 

260 

2.9 

802 

1,277 

5-i 

New  Hampshire  . . . 

122 

428 

2.9 

70 

221 

i-3 

121 

371 

.8 

V  ermont  . 

55 

188 

1-3 

42 

134 

.8 

79 

251 

.5 

Massachusetts  . 

165 

224 

4.0 

112 

113 

2.2 

135 

no 

.8 

Rhode  Island  . 

66 

611 

1.6 

19 

128 

•  4 

4i 

235 

•3 

Connecticut  . 

34 

109 

.8 

19 

52 

•  4 

21 

45 

.1 

Middle  Atlantic : 

New  York  . 

2,520 

1,038 

60.6 

3,585 

1,157 

69.4 

4,186 

1,079 

26.5 

New  Jersey . 

12 

33 

•  3 

6 

13 

.  1 

25 

37 

. 2 

Pennsylvania  . 

210 

122 

5-o 

166 

72 

3-2 

53i 

183 

3-3 

East  North  Central: 

Ohio  . 

213 

140 

5-i 

354 

179 

6.9 

1,664 

711 

10.' 

Indiana  . 

28 

4i 

•  7 

46 

46 

•  9 

382 

283 

2.4 

Illinois  . 

82 

173 

2.0 

hi 

130 

2.1 

1,037 

605 

6.( 

Michigan  . 

128 

602 

3-1 

75 

189 

1.4 

308 

411 

Wisconsin  . 

11 

357 

.2 

210 

687 

4.1 

707 

912 

4-5 

West  North  Central: 

"MinnpQnta 

r 

200 

no 

638 

b 

./ 

Town  . 

1 

17 

25 

131 

.5 

467 

692 

3-C 

Missouri  . 

10 

26 

•  3 

10 

14 

.2 

228 

193 

1.4 

"NIpKra  ctr  a 

I 

38 

TCnnsa  <; 

5 

44 

Mountain : 

Npw  A/fp'X’irn 

6 

65 

Utah 

2 

158 

10 

248 

.] 

N pvp A  n 

2 

233 

Pacific : 

W  n  <;  Vi  i  n  ctnri 

5 

399 

Oregon  . 

26 

500 

•  2 

California  . 

10 

105 

.2 

4,4i5 

11,620 

27.9 

29  U.  S.  Census  of  i860 ,  Agriculture,  p.  lxviii. 


Chapter  XXIX. — Flax  and  Hemp. 

FLAX  GROWN  FOR  SEED  RATHER  THAN  FOR  OIL. 

While  the  census  of  1840  gives  no  satisfactory  statistics  regarding  the 
production  of  flax,  considerable  quantities  of  the  fiber  were  grown  in  Kentucky, 
Virginia,  and  New  York.  Indiana  and  Ohio  flax  was  said  to  be  grown  chiefly 
for  seed  and  for  use  in  making  home-made  linen.1  Outside  these  five  States 
very  little  flax  was  grown. 

While  the  growing  of  flax  for  seed  was  said  to  be  increasingly  profitable 
as  the  demand  for  linseed  oil  increased,2  the  growing  of  flax  fiber  was  gener¬ 
ally  regarded  as  an  uncertain  and  unprofitable  business  during  the  forties. 
Judge  Van  Wyck,  at  a  meeting  of  the  New  York  Farmers  Club,  in  1845, 
stated  the  situation  as  follows  :  3 

“  I  fear  the  culture  of  flax  will  not  repay  the  farmer  if  it  is  conducted  as  it  has  hitherto 
been  done  for  fifty  years  past.  Too  much  labor,  too  much  cost  in  getting  it  prepared 
and  sent  to  a  proper  market.  The  price  of  seven  and  a  half  cents  to  twelve  and  a  half 

cents  a  pound  will  not  remunerate  the  producer .  Grain  crops  cost  us  nothing 

like  the  labor  and  expense  of  flax . It  will  never  do  in  the  northern  States,  unless 

some  revolution  is  effected  in  the  culture,  dressing,  etc.  If,  by  machinery,  the  difficulties 
can  be  overcome,  than  it  may  answer.” 

Cheap  cotton  appeared  to  be  the  accepted  reason  for  the  low  price  of  flax. 
The  census  of  1850  showed  that  the  leading  States  in  the  production  of  flax 
fiber  were  Kentucky,  1,050  tons  ;  Virginia,  500  tons ;  and  New  York,  470  tons. 
Ohio  produced  189,000  bushels  of  flaxseed,  or  over  one-third  of  all  the 
flaxseed  reported.  In  the  New  England  States  and  also  in  the  territory  west 
of  Indiana  comparatively  little  flax  was  grown.  (See  figs.  84  and  85.) 
In  Ohio,  flax  was  largely  cultivated  for  the  seed  alone;  in  the  Miami  Valley 
particularly  this  branch  of  agriculture  was  carried  on  extensively.4  Preble 
County,  Ohio,  was  said  to  be  the  greatest  flax-growing  county  in  the  United 
States.5  Dayton  and  Cincinnati  were  large  markets  for  flaxseed.  In  the 
former  city  150,000  bushels  of  seed  were  said  to  be  pressed  for  oil  annually. 
The  oil  was  shipped  to  New  York  and  the  oil-cake  to  England.6 

1  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1844,  p.  97. 

2  Ibid.,  100. 

8  Ibid.,  (1845),  p.  726. 

4  Cultivator,  new  series,  VII  (1850),  p.  129. 

6  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1847,  p.  164. 

c  Cultivator,  new  series,  VII  (1850),  p.  129. 


359 


360 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


Fig.  84. — Flaxseed,  1849.  Each  dot  represents  25,000  bushels. 


Fig.  85. — Flaxseed,  1859.  Each  dot  represents  10,000  bushels. 

By  i860  the  Cincinnati  region  had  still  further  developed.  One-half  the  total  flax¬ 
seed  crop  was  grown  in  this  vicinity. 


FLAX  AND  HEMP 


361 


Table  44.— Flaxseed:  Production  in  the  United  States. 


[Source:  U.  S.  censuses  of  1850  and  i860.] 


Geographic  division 
and  State. 

1850. 

i860. 

Total 

(bu.) 

Per 

cent  of 
U.  S. 
total. 

Total 

(bu.) 

Per 

cent  of 
U.  S. 
total. 

United  States  . 

562,312 

100.0 

566,867 

100.0 

Geographic  Division : 

New  England . 

2483 

0.4 

896 

0.2 

Middle  Atlantic . 

Il6,2l6 

20.7 

84,430 

15-0 

East  North  Central  . . . 

238,265 

42.4 

375,107 

66.2 

West  North  Central  . . 

15,655 

2.8 

10,708 

1.9 

Mountain  . 

c 

Pacific  . 

OO 

36 

New  England : 

Maine  . 

580 

.  I 

419 

.1 

New  Hampshire  . 

189 

"to 

Vermont  . 

939 

.2 

33i 

.  1 

Massachusetts  . 

72 

7 

Rhode  Island  . 

Connecticut  . 

703 

.  I 

109 

Middle  Atlantic: 

New  York . 

57,963 

10.3 

56,991 

10. 1 

New  Jersey  . 

16,525 

3-0 

3,241 

.6 

Pennsylvania  . 

41,728 

7.4 

24,198 

4-3 

East  North  Central : 

Ohio  . 

188,880 

33-6 

242,420 

42.8 

Indiana  . 

36,888 

6.6 

1 19,420 

21. 1 

Illinois  . 

10,787 

1.9 

8,670 

1-5 

Michigan  . 

519 

.  1 

34i 

.1 

Wisconsin  . 

1,191 

.2 

4,256 

.7 

West  North  Central : 

Minnesota  . 

118 

Iowa  . 

1,959 

•4 

5,92i 

1. 1 

Missouri  . 

13,696 

2.4 

4,656 

.8 

Nebraska  . 

2 

Kansas  . 

11 

Mountain : 

Utah  . 

5 

33 

Pacific : 

Washington  . 

'to 

Oregon  . 

6 

California  . 

LOCAL  MARKETS  FOR  SEED  AND  FIBER. 

Oil  mills  and  fiber  mills  were  constantly  springing  up,  and  offering  induce¬ 
ments  to  farmers  to  grow  flax.  The  following  report  is  from  Miami  County, 
Ohio,  in  1846 : 7 

“  The  production  of  flax  for  the  seed  has  been  very  considerable  the  past  season. 
Persons  desirous  of  purchasing  large  quantities  furnished  the  seed  to  farmers  during 
the  preceding  winter,  at  the  same  time,  taking  written  contracts  for  the  delivery  of  the 

crop  to  them  at  the  price  of  eighty  cents  per  bushel,  or  the  market  price .  By 

means  of  these  stimulants  large  quantities  were  produced.” 


7  Ohio  State  Board  of  Agriculture,  1st  Annual  Report  (1846),  p.  55. 


362 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


Another  report  from  St.  Joseph  County,  Indiana,  reads  as  follows: 8 

“  The  customary  rate  of  exchange  at  Oil  Mills  is  a  gallon  of  oil  for  a  bushel  of 

see([ .  No  investment  pays  better  than  a  few  acres  in  flaxseed  bartered  for  oil 

and  spread  upon  our  buildings,  farming  utensils  and  gates.” 


Table  45. — Flax  fiber:  Production  in  the  United  States. 


[Source:  U.  S.  Censuses  of  1850  and  i860.] 


1850. 

i860. 

Geographic  division  and 
State. 

Total 

(1,000 

lbs.) 

Per 

cent  of 
U.  S. 
total. 

Total 

(1,000 

ibs.) 

Per 

cent  of 
U.  S. 
total'. 

TTnJfprl  .States  . 

7  7m 

100.0 

4,720 

100.0 

Geographic  Division: 

New  England . 

Middle  Atlantic . 

East  North  Central... 
West  North  Central.. 

Mnnnfain  . 

65 

1,653 

1,267 

590 

I 

.8 

21.5 

16.4 

7.6 

13 

1,879 

1,054 

143 

4 

.3 

39-8 

22.3 

3-o 

.1 

I 

a 

New  England : 

A/faine  . 

17 

.2 

3 

.  1 

New  Hampshire  . 

Vermont  . 

8 

21 

T 

2 

•  3 

7 

.2 

1 

a 

a 

icnoae  isianu  . 

18 

.2 

1 

Middle  Atlantic : 

New  York  . . 

940 

183 

530 

447 

12.2 

1,518 

32.2 

New  Tersev . 

2.4 

49 

1 .0 

Ppnn  Avivan  ia  . . 

6.9 

312 

6.6 

East  North  Central: 

Ohio  . 

5.8 

883 

18.7 

Indiana  . 

585 

7.6 

97 

2.0 

Illinois  . 

160 

2.0 

48 

1 .0 

Michigan  . 

7 

.  1 

4 

.1 

Wisconsin  . 

68 

•9 

22 

•  5 

West  North  Central 

A/f  innpsr>ta  . 

2 

.  1 

Iowa  . 

63 

.8 

30 

.6 

Missouri  . 

527 

6.8 

no 

2.3 

TC  ansa  s 

1 

Mountain : 

Utah  . 

1 

4 

.1 

Pacific : 

Orecrnn 

1 

a 

a  Less  than  500  pounds 


More  or  less  flax  was  still  grown  in  the  family  “  flax  patch.”  In  Gallia 
County,  Ohio,  in  1849,  it  was  said:9 

“  The  operations  in  flax  culture  are  very  limited,  many  of  the  old  matrons  (notwith¬ 
standing  the  cheapness  of  cotton  fabric),  annually  have  a  ‘  flax  patch  from  which  they 
are  enabled  to  make  sewing  thread,  table  linen  and  towels.  The  seed  from  which,  above 
a  stock  of  seed  for  the  next  season,  is  taken  to  market,  and  not  more  than  950  barrels 
has  found  its  way  to  all  points  of  trade  in  the  county,  since  June  last.” 


8  Prairie  Farmer,  XII  (1852),  p.  199. 

9  Ohio  State  Board  of  Agriculture,  4th  Annual  Report  (1849),  p.  9 7- 


FLAX  AND  HEMP 


363 


In  regions  of  the  West  where  flax  was  grown  for  seed  the  straw  was  com¬ 
monly  not  utilized,  a  fact  which  was  greatly  lamented  by  many  of  the  older 
flax  growers.10  When  threshed  by  machine,  the  straw  was  left  in  a  “  rough  and 
tangled  ”  condition;  yet  mills  were  established,  and  many  attempts  made  to 
utilize  the  straw  in  the  manufacture  of  paper.* 11  At  Beloit,  Wisconsin,  in  1854, 
flax-straw  was  reported  to  be  worth  from  $4  to  $7  a  ton  at  the  paper  mill ; 12 
in  Winnebago  County,  Illinois,  $5  a  ton.13  In  Seneca  County,  New  York, 
in  1853,  flax  straw  was  worth  $5  a  ton  for  manufacturing  into  lint.  Flax  grown 
for  fiber  was  pulled  by  hand  or  cut  with  the  cradle.  When  grown  for  seed  it 
was  cut  with  the  cradle  and  sometimes  threshed  with  a  machine,  but  a  more 
common  way  was  to  tramp  it  out  with  horses.14  Flax  fiber  was  largely  dew- 
retted  instead  of  water-retted,15  as  in  the  old-fashioned  system. 

DECREASE  IN  FIBER  AND  INCREASE  IN  SEED,  1850  TO  1860. 

The  census  of  i860  showed  that  the  production  of  flax  fiber  had  decreased 
from  7,700,000  pounds  in  1849  4,700,000  pounds  in  1859,  a  falling  off 

of  nearly  one-half  during  the  decade.  Meanwhile,  the  production  of  flax  for 
seed  had  increased  but  slightly  (less  than  4,500  pounds).  (See  figs.  84  and 
85.)  New  York,  which  reported  a  considerable  increase  since  1850,  now 
led  in  the  production  of  flax  fiber.  Ohio,  Kentucky,  Virginia,  Pennsylvania, 
and  North  Carolina  followed  in  the  order  named.  New  York  and  Ohio  were 
the  only  States  showing  a  considerable  increase  in  flax  production.  In  the  pro¬ 
duction  of  seed,  Ohio  and  Indiana  led  the  States,  with  New  York,  Virginia, 
and  Kentucky  next  in  order.  These  five  States  produced  84  per  cent  of  the 
total  crop  of  flaxseed  in  1859.  The  production  of  flaxseed  and  fiber  in  the 
family  flax  patch  was  decreasing  and  flax  had  not  yet  become  a  distinctive 
pioneer  crop  in  the  West. 

HEMP  PRODUCTION  IN  1840. 

The  census  of  1840,  which  reported  hemp  and  flax  together,  showed  that 
Virginia  led  all  the  States  in  the  production  of  these  crops,  but  the  figures 
given  were  rather  generally  criticized  as  inaccurate.  Charles  Cist,  writing  in 
1845,  asserted :  “  Kentucky  and  Missouri  produce  more  hemp  than  all  the 
rest  of  the  United  States,  and  ten  times  as  much  as  either  Ohio,  Indiana  or 
Virginia.”  A  Kentucky  correspondent  wrote: 

“There  are  probably  not  100  tons  of  hemp  produced  in  Virginia.  It  is  grown  to  a 
limited  extent  in  the  ^counties  of  Virginia  bordering  on  the  Ohio  River.  The  product  in 
Kentucky  is  about  15,000  tons;  of  Missouri  6,000  to  8,000  tons;  Indiana  and  Illinois 
500  tons;  Ohio  500  to  1,000  tons.” 

Hon.  Adam  Beatty,  in  1844,  estimated  the  amount  of  hemp  grown  in  Ken¬ 
tucky  for  the  past  2  years  as  about  12,000  tons  per  annum.16  Kentucky  and 

10  Prairie  Farmer,  XII  (1852),  p.  198. 

11  Ibid.,  XIV  (1854),  p.  283;  Cultivator,  new  series,  VII  (1850),  p.  308. 

12  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1854,  Agriculture,  p.  186. 

13  Prairie  Farmer,  XIV  (1854),  p.  283. 

14  Ibid.,  XII  (1852),  p.  199. 

15  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1845,  pp.  726,  732. 

16  Ibid.,  1844,  p.  96. 


364 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


Missouri  were  generally  considered  as  the  leading  States  in  hemp  production 
in  1840. 

In  Missouri,  hemp  was  grown  mainly  in  Lafayette  County  and  in  other 
counties  bordering  on  the  Missouri  River.  In  Kentucky,  hemp  production  was 
concentrated  in  the  heart  of  the  limestone  district.  Mason,  Bourbon,  Mont¬ 
gomery,  Clarke,  Fayette,  Woodford,  and  Scott  Counties  in  1844  were  re¬ 
garded  as  best  adapted  for  hemp,  and  in  them  the  crop  was  extensively 
grown.17 

METHODS  OF  CULTIVATION  AND  HARVESTING. 

In  Kentucky,  the  growing  of  successive  crops  of  hemp  for  9  or  10  years 
on  the  same  land  was  frequent.  “  Good  hemp  land,  in  Mason  County,”  it  was 
said,18  “  will  upon  an  average,  in  ordinary  seasons,  yield  a  ton  (2,240  lbs.) 
for  every  three  acres.”  The  methods  of  sowing  and  culture  were  similar  to 
those  employed  with  corn.  Adam  Beatty  reported  19  in  1844: 

“  Pulling  is  still  practiced  by  some.  With  hemp  hooks,  tolerable  hands  will  cut,  on  an 
average,  half  an  acre  each;  with  cradling  scythes,  an  acre  may  be  cut  with  ease,  by 

good  hands,  in  hemp  not  exceeding  six  or  seven  feet  high . First  rate  hands  on  the 

common  break  will  clean  two  hundred  pounds  per  day,  upon  an  average.  Two  of  my 
best  hands,  during  the  past  season,  for  every  day  they  broke,  favorable  and  unfavorable, 
averaged  186  pounds.  Two  others,  who  are  young  men,  and  not  full  hands,  average 
144  pounds.  The  ordinary  task  for  hands  is  100  pounds.  Many  efforts  have  been  made 
to  clean  hemp  by  machinery,  but  hitherto  without  success.  At  least  no  method  has  yet 
been  discovered,  that  answers  as  well  as  the  common  hand  breake.”  20 

Nearly  all  the  hemp  grown  in  Kentucky  and  Missouri  was  dew-retted  and 
manufactured  into  rope  and  bagging  for  use  in  the  cotton  trade  of  the  south. 
A  considerable  quantity,  however,  was  shipped  to  eastern  cities  for  use  in 
making  rope  for  ship-rigging  and  into  cable.21  Adam  Beatty  reported  that  in 
1844  there  was  received  at  Maysville,  Kentucky,  a  leading  market,  2,669  tons 
of  dew-retted  hemp  and  81  tons  of  water-retted  hemp.22 

ATTEMPTS  TO  PRODUCE  WATER-RETTED  HEMP. 

In  consequence  of  the  increasing  production  and  the  limited  demand  of  the 
cotton  trade  for  bagging  and  rope,  a  considerable  surplus  of  dew-retted  hemp 
accumulated  in  the  hands  of  the  hemp  growers  in  the  early  forties.23  The 
Kentucky  hemp-grower  was  anxious  to  improve  the  quality  of  his  hemp  by 
some  cheap  method,  thus  producing  a  good  grade  of  clean  hemp  which  could 
be  sold  on  the  market  for  naval  and  merchant  service  in  competition  with 
that  which  was  imported.24 

"The  great  difficulty  [reported  one]  is  a  process  of  water-retting  and  a  break- 
such  as  would  enable  the  farmer  properly  to  prepare  for  the  market  much  of  the  hemp, 
which  is  now  converted  into  bagging  or  wasted.”  25 


17  Beatty,  Essays  on  Practical  Agriculture,  112. 
is  Ibid., 1 13. 

19  Ibid.,  10 7,  108. 

20  Ibid.,  1 12. 

21  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1845,  p.  701. 

22  Ibid.,  1844,  p.  95. 

23  Ibid.,  96. 

24  Ibid.,  1844,  p.  276.  The  principal  source  of  foreign  supply  was  Russia. 
23  Ibid.,  98. 


FLAX  AND  HEMP 


365 


The  Federal  Government  in  1841  authorized  a  bounty,  which  allowed  for  the 
payment  of  not  more  than  $280  per  ton  for  American  water-retted  hemp,  pro¬ 
vided  it  was  suitable  for  naval  cordage.26  Many  of  the  planters  prepared 
large  pools  and  water-retted  the  hemp  they  produced.  But  the  work  was  so 
hard  on  negroes  that  the  practice  was  abandoned.  Many  negroes  died  of 
pneumonia  contracted  from  working  in  the  hemp-pools  in  the  winter,  and 
mortality  became  so  great  among  the  hemp  hands  that  the  increase  in  value 
of  the  hemp  did  not  equal  the  loss  in  negroes.  Besides,  the  difficulty  of 
finding  a  market  for  the  water-retted  hemp  at  a  higher  price  than  the  dew- 
retted  hemp,  discouraged  many  from  further  attempts  at  water-retting.27 
Shipments  of  dew-retted  hemp  were  made  to  Europe,  but  apparently  without 
much  success.  One  shipment  sent  to  Europe  was  reported  to  have  returned 
but  $40  per  ton.28 

In  1850  the  production  of  hemp  was  generally  reported  to  be  on  the  increase. 
The  census  of  that  year  credited  Kentucky  with  18,000  tons  and  Missouri 
with  16,000  tons.  A  total  of  1,057  tons  was  produced  in  all  other  States. 
From  Clarke  County,  Kentucky,  it  was  reported  in  1851  that  cutting  had 
almost  entirely  superseded  the  old  method  of  pulling.29  In  1859  the  Kentucky 
production  was  reported  to  have  more  than  doubled,  and  was  now  estimated 
at  39,000  tons.30  The  crop  in  Missouri  showed  but  little  increase,  amounting 
to  only  19,000  tons.  Indiana  produced  4,000  tons,  North  Carolina  3,000,  and 
Tennessee  2,250  tons.  22  other  states  produced  a  total  of  7,200  tons.  North 
of  the  Ohio  River  many  attempts  were  being  made  to  grow  hemp  but  with 
little  success.  Many  counties  in  central  Illinois  experienced  a  hemp  fever  of 
short  duration  in  1843. 31 

26  Ibid.,  275. 

27  Beatty,  Essays  in  Practical  Agriculture,  hi. 

28  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1845,  p.  700. 

29  Ibid.,  1851,  Agriculture,  360. 

30  U.  S.  Census  of  i860,  Agriculture,  65. 

31  Prairie  Farmer,  VIII,  1847,  p.  305;  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1844,  P-  97  > 

ibid.,  1843,  p.  69. 


Chapter  XXX. — Hay. 


The  hay-producing  area  of  the  United  States  in  1840  was  mainly  in  the 
northeastern  States.  In  New  England  and  in  New  York,  Pennsylvania,  and 
New  Jersey,  with  the  exception  of  the  wheat  region  of  western  New  York 
and  western  Pennsylvania,  hay  was  regarded  as  the  staple  crop.  In  Ohio, 
hay  was  a  substantial  crop,  but  farther  west  the  sparse  population  and  vast 
prairies  and  marshes  rendered  the  cultivation  of  English  grasses  and  clover 
an  object  of  little  importance.  There  but  little  hay  was  harvested,  and  that 
largely  from  native  grasses.  (See  fig.  86.) 


Fig.  86. — Hay,  1839.  Each  dot  represent  5,000  tons. 

In  the  northeastern  states  the  feeding  of  livestock  through  long 
winters  required  large  amounts  of  hay.  In  the  Mississippi  Valley  the 
unoccupied  prairie  furnished  abundant  pasture  during  the  summer  and 
some  feeding  the  winter.  But  little  attention  was  given  to  seeding  the 
cultivated  grasses.  The  short  winters  and  abundant  corn  crop  of  Ken¬ 
tucky  made  hay  less  necessary  there. 

IMPORTANCE  OF  THE  HAY  CROP  IN  THE  EAST. 

The  census  reports  show  tons  of  hay  harvested,  but  no  statistics  are  given 
for  pasture  lands,  hence  the  figures  do  not  indicate  the  relative  importance  of 
the  grass-crop  in  the  different  regions.  In  New  England  and  New  York, 
where  the  long  winters  and  the  mixed  system  of  farming  made  a  large  supply 
of  fodder  necessary,  a  considerable  portion  of  the  grass  was  harvested  as 
hay.  In  the  bluegrass  region  of  Kentucky  and  in  much  of  the  West,  on  the 
other  hand,  where  cattle-raising  was  a  leading  industry,  less  hay  was  har¬ 
vested  than  in  the  East,  since  the  livestock  was  pastured  during  much  of  the 
year. 


366 


HAY 


367 


The  culture  of  hay  in  the  older  settled  region  of  the  East  had  undergone 
rapid  and  important  changes  since  the  beginning  of  the  century.  Before  the 
introduction  of  the  practice  of  sowing  clover  and  timothy,  an  event  which  in 


Table  46. — Hay  and  forage:  Production  in  the  United  States. 
[Source:  U.  S.  censuses  of  1840,  1850  and  i860.] 


Geographic  division 
and  State. 

1840. 

1850. 

i860. 

Total 

(1000 

tons). 

Per  cent 
of  U.  S. 
total. 

Total 

(1000 

tons). 

Per  cent 
of  U.  S. 
total. 

Total 

(1000 

tons). 

Per  cent 
of  U.  S. 
total. 

United  States  . 

10,248 

100.0 

I3-839 

100.0 

19,084 

100.0 

Geographic  Division : 

New  England  . 

3084 

30.1 

3,464 

25.0 

3,869 

20.3 

Middle  Atlantic  . 

4,774 

4  6.6 

6,008 

43-4 

6,319 

33.1 

East  North  Central .... 

1,527 

14.9 

3,129 

22.6 

5,585 

293 

West  North  Central... 

67 

•7 

208 

1-5 

i,475 

7-7 

Mountain  . 

g 

2^ 

.1 

Pacific  . 

2 

338 

1  8 

New  England: 

Maine  . 

691 

6.7 

756 

5-5 

976 

5-i 

New  Hampshire  . 

496 

4-8 

599 

4-3 

643 

3-4 

Vermont  . 

837 

8.2 

866 

6-3 

940 

4.9 

Massachusetts  . 

569 

5-6 

652 

4-7 

665 

3-5 

Rhode  Island  . 

64 

.6 

75 

•5 

83 

•5 

Connecticut  . 

427 

4.2 

516 

37 

562 

2.9 

Middle  Atlantic: 

New  York  . 

3,127 

30.5 

3,729 

26.9 

3,565 

18.7 

New  Jersey  . 

335 

3-3 

436 

3-2 

509 

2.6 

Pennsylvania  . 

1,312 

12.8 

1,843 

13-3 

2,245 

11.8 

East  North  Central : 

Ohio  . 

1.022 

10.0 

1,443 

10.4 

1,565 

8.2 

Indiana  . 

178 

1-7 

403 

2.9 

622 

3-3 

Illinois  . 

165 

1.6 

602 

4.4 

i,775 

9-3 

Michigan  . 

131 

1.3 

405 

2.9 

768 

4.0 

Wisconsin  . 

3i 

•3 

276 

2.0 

855 

4-5 

West  North  Central : 

Minnesota  . 

2 

180 

o 

Iowa  . 

18 

.2 

89 

.6 

813 

•V 

4-3 

Missouri  . 

49 

•5 

117 

•9 

401 

2.1 

Dakota  Territory  . 

1 

Nebraska  . 

2d 

x 

Kansas  . .* . 

56 

•3 

Mountain : 

New  Mexico  . 

I 

Utah  . 

c 

20 

.1 

Nevada  . 

2 

Pacific : 

Washington  . 

d 

Oregon  . 

a 

28 

2 

California  . 

2 

306 

1.6 

*  Less  than  500  tons. 


1840  was  still  within  the  recollection  of  the  older  farmers,  the  supply  of  hay 
was  limited  to  that  procured  from  natural  meadows,  watered  by  the  overflow 
of  streams  or  by  irrigation.1  The  increased  use  of  clover,  gypsum,  lime,  and 
manure,  and  improved  methods  of  tillage,  had  brought  about  marked  changes 


1  See  above,  p.  103. 


368 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


by  1840.  The  uplands  were  now  commonly  considered  as  productive  in  grass 
as  the  lowlands.  Clover  and  gypsum  were  regarded  as  the  basis  of  the  new 
system  of  agriculture. 

New  York,  with  over  3,000,000  tons,  led  the  States  in  the  production  of 
hay  in  1839.  With  the  decrease  of  wheat  production  and  the  development  of 
dairying  and  grazing,  hay  had  become  the  chief  crop  in  the  central  part  of 
the  State — in  Oneida,  Madison,  Chenango,  Herkimer,  Otsego,  and  Montgom¬ 
ery  counties.  In  the  wheat-growing  region  of  the  western  part  of  the  State 
it  had  been  found  that  the  growing  of  clover  and  the  grazing  of  cattle  and 
sheep  on  depleted  wheat  lands  would  greatly  increase  their  yields.  For  the 
surplus  hay  produced  in  the  region  of  the  Hudson  River  and  Long  Island, 
New  York  City  furnished  a  large  market. 

IN  NEW  YORK— HAY  ON  UPLANDS  AND  MEADOWS. 

In  central  and  eastern  New  York,  as  in  New  England,  it  was  the  aim  of  the 
farmer  to  produce  as  much  grass  as  possible.  The  usual  cropping  system  on  the 
uplands  included  one  cultivated  crop  and  one  grain  crop.  The  grass  and 
clover  seed  was  sown  by  hand  among  the  grain  and  the  land  was  then  allowed 
to  lie  in  grass  for  hay  or  pasture  from  2  to  6  years. 

Farm  manure  was  commonly  applied  to  the  land  at  the  time  of  seeding.  It 
was  the  universal  custom  to  sow  from  1  to  2  bushels  of  gypsum  per  acre,  and 
often  the  land  was  given  a  top-dressing  of  gypsum  each  succeeding  spring.  It 
was  claimed,  however,  that  gypsum  no  longer  had  its  former  beneficial  effect, 
especially  on  old  lands.2  On  the  wheat  lands  of  western  New  York  the  clover 
crop  was  considered  essential.  “  Clover,  plaster  and  wheat  ”  were  said  to  be 
regarded  as  “  the  three  indispensables  for  any  well-regulated  wheat  farm.” 
It  was  usual,  after  from  one  to  three  crops  of  wheat,  to  sow  clover  among  the 
wheat,  and  then  to  leave  the  ground  in  meadow  or  pasture  for  2  or  3  years, 
when  it  was  again  turned  under  for  wheat.3 

Meadows  and  pasture  lands  were  not  suffered  to  lie  as  long  as  formerly 
without  plowing.4  The  “  old  meadow  system,”  of  having  lowlands  in  perma¬ 
nent  meadow  which  was  seldom  top-dressed  and  never  ploughed,  was  being 
gradually  abandoned.  Meadows  were  now  more  frequently  top-dressed,  or 
ploughed  up  and  reseeded.  There  were  several  ways  of  doing  this.  One  way 
was  to  sow  the  grass  seed  over  the  deteriorated  turf  and  then  to  harrow  it  in 
by  repeatedly  passing  over  it  a  heavy,  sharp-toothed  harrow.  Another  method 
was  to  turn  over  the  defective  meadow  or  pasture  in  the  fall,  to  give  it  a 
dressing  of  manure  in  the  spring,  and  then  to  seed  to  spring  wheat,  oats, 
barley,  or  corn.  Grass-seed  was  sown  in  the  grain  in  the  spring  or  in  the  com 
in  the  fall.5  In  the  wheat  region  of  the  western  part  of  New  York,  the  system 
of  meadows  on  the  low-lying  lands  and  creek-flats  commonly  prevailed,  but 
these  were  more  frequently  top-dressed  than  formerly. 


2  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1850,  Agriculture,  469. 

3  N.  Y.  State  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions,  II  (1842),  p.  53. 

*Ibid.,  158. 

5  Ibid.,  1 15. 


HAY 


369 


IN  NEW  ENGLAND. 

In  New  England,  the  cropping  system  was  usually  planned  to  produce  the 
maximum  amount  of  hay.  A  common  rotation  was  corn,  potatoes,  oats ;  the 
land  was  then  seeded  and  remained  in  grass  from  3  to  6  years,  or,  in  general, 
as  long  as  it  continued  to  yield  a  ton  of  hay  to  an  acre.  Compost,  manure, 
and  gypsum  were  commonly  applied  at  the  time  of  sowing.  General  livestock 
farming,  lumbering  in  the  North,  and  the  presence  of  New  York  City,  Boston, 
and  other  towns,  both  inland  and  seaboard,  furnished  ready  markets  for  the 
farmer’s  surplus  crop  of  hay.  Some  was  shipped  to  the  Southern  States.  In 
the  vicinity  of  the  ocean,  marsh  hay  was  used  in  large  quantities  for  feeding 
cattle.6 


IN  EASTERN  PENNSYLVANIA. 

In  eastern  Pennsylvania,  hay  was  largely  produced  in  the  established  rota¬ 
tion  of  corn,  oats,  wheat,  and  grass,  with  the  grass-land  cut  or  grazed  for  2 
to  4  years.  It  was  reported  from  Dauphin  County  that,  before  lime  came  into 
use,  a  crop  of  clover  was  generally  ploughed  under  before  seeding  to  wheat, 
but  that  since  then  the  crop  was  generally  taken  off  before  the  sod  was  turned.7 
Philadelphia  and  the  National  Road  furnished  markets  for  the  surplus  crop. 

IN  KENTUCKY. 

In  Kentucky,  where  the  bluegrass  pastures  furnished  available  feed  for  the 
entire  year,  but  little  hay  was  harvested.  In  parts  of  the  State,  where  the 
grazing  of  cattle  was  extensively  practiced,  farmers  were  in  the  habit  of  sow¬ 
ing  down  in  bluegrass  the  land  which  had  been  most  exhausted  by  repeated 
cultivation  of  corn  and  wheat.  Others  followed  the  practice  of  clearing  up 
and  thinning  out  the  woodland,  and  seeding  down  to  bluegrass  for  pastures.8 
Clover  was  extensively  grown  for  a  pasture  crop,  but  the  use  of  hay  was  so 
limited  that  little  attention  was  paid  to  meadows.  Corn-fodder  and  oats  were 
generally  substituted  for  hay. 

LACK  OF  SUCCESS  WITH  CULTIVATED  GRASSES  ON  THE 

PRAIRIES. 

West  of  Ohio,  the  small  amounts  of  hay  which  were  harvested  consisted 
chiefly  of  wild  prairie  and  marsh  grass.  The  natural  prairies  and  meadows 
of  Michigan,  Illinois,  and  Iowa,  and  the  prairies  interspersed  with  marsh  land 
in  Wisconsin  and  Indiana,  produced  an  abundant  supply  of  hay,  indeed,  far 
beyond  the  wants  of  the  country  at  the  time.  To  the  early  farmers  who  settled 
on  the  higher  land  the  prairies  and  marshes  were  of  inestimable  value,  provid¬ 
ing  them  with  milk,  butter,  and  cheese,  as  well  as  with  forage  for  fattening 
swine  and  cattle,  until  farms  could  be  properly  opened. 

As  the  result  of  many  failures,  the  opinion  was  current  that  cultivated 
grasses  would  not  thrive  on  prairie  lands.  But  as  the  prairies  afforded  suffi- 

6  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1849,  Agriculture,  291. 

7  Ibid.,  1851,  p.  254. 

8  Beatty,  Essays  in  Practical  Agriculture,  64,  66,  67. 

25 


370 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


cient  wild  grass  for  hay,  the  need  of  tame  hay  was  not  urgent  and  but  few 
persistent  attempts  were  made  to  grow  it,  nor  was  much  attention  given  to 
the  curing  of  hay.  A  correspondent 9  wrote  : 

“  it  js  quite  common  to  begin  Monday  and  to  continue  to  mow  till  Saturday,  when 
with  hand  rakes  and  horse  rakes,  all  turn  in,  take  it  up  and  stack  it;  and  this  is  done  too, 
without  much  regard  to  the  state  of  the  weather  at  the  time  it  is  raked,  or  to  what  it 
may  have  been  after  it  was  cut.  The  appearance  of  the  animals  which  are  fed  on  hay 
thus  managed,  is  evidence  enough  of  its  worthlessness. 


Fig.  87. — Hay,  1849.  Each  dot  represents  5,000  tons. 

With  the  settlement  of  the  Mississippi  Valley  the  harvesting  of  hay  increased. 


HAY  MORE  OF  A  CASH  CROP  IN  THE  EAST  AFTER  1850. 

The  census  of  1850  showed  that  there  had  been  a  general  increase  in  the 
production  of  hay,  and  that  although  its  cultivation  was  still  confined  princi¬ 
pally  to  the  eastern  States,  the  production  in  the  West  was  increasing.  The 
Western  Reserve  in  Ohio,  Michigan,  southern  Wisconsin,  and  northern  Illi¬ 
nois  were  the  localities  of  greatest  increase.  (See  fig.  87.)  New  York,  Ohio, 
Pennsylvania,  and  New  Jersey  led  in  the  production  of  hay  and  clover  seed. 

In  New  York  the  counties  on  the  Hudson  reported  a  growing  demand  for 
hay  from  the  New  York  market.10  In  Philadelphia  County  it  was  said  that 
dairying  was  not  so  extensively  carried  on  as  formerly,  since  most  farmers 
found  it  more  profitable  to  sell  hay.* 11  In  the  vicinity  of  Rochester  hay  was 
said  to  be  a  very  profitable  crop.12  Nearness  to  market  or  water  transportation 

9  Cultivator,  new  series,  I  (1844),  p.  173. 

i°  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1849,  Agriculture ,  101,  106;  1853,  P-  2I9- 

11  Ibid.,  1851,  p.  239. 

12  Ibid.,  1853,  p.  219. 


HAY 


371 


was  necessary  for  profitable  hay  sale.  Railroads  were  few,  and  their  freight 
rates  were  high.  As  late  as  1855  the  cost  of  transporting  hay  from  Allegheny 
County  in  western  New  York  to  New  York  City  was  said  to  be  $12  a  ton.13 

INCREASED  ATTENTION  TO  CULTIVATED  GRASSES 

IN  THE  WEST. 

Farther  West,  in  Ohio,  the  grass  crop  was  becoming  more  important,  as  the 
profits  of  grazing  for  several  years  had  been  greater  than  those  derived  from 
the  growing  of  grain.  In  the  grain-growing  regions  of  Indiana  clover  was  be¬ 
coming  more  common.  From  Wayne  County,  in  1851,  it  was  reported;14 
"  Clover  is  beginning  to  be  much  cultivated  for  the  purpose  of  resting  and 
enriching  the  soil.  It  is  principally  pastured  by  hogs  and  cattle ;  seldom  being 
cut  for  hay/’  Many  allowed  the  last  crop  to  grow  and  harvested  the  seed. 

On  the  prairies  of  northern  Illinois,  Wisconsin,  and  eastern  Iowa,  more 
attention  was  now  given  to  the  cultivation  of  clover  and  grasses.  The  increased 
interest  in  general  farming  and  livestock,  together  with  the  inclosing  of  the 
open  prairies  during  the  poor  wheat  crops  15  succeeding  1847,  resulted  in 
increased  attention  to  the  cultivation  of  the  improved  grasses.16  The  native 
prairie  grasses  were  not  adapted  to  livestock  farming  and  pasturage,  since 
they  appeared  late  in  the  spring  and  failed  early  in  the  fall.17' 

HAY  PROVES  A  SUCCESSFUL  CROP  ON  PRAIRIE  FARMS. 

The  increased  care  given  to  the  cultivation  of  grasses  because  of  the  greater 
demand  for  hay  was  disproving  the  theory  that  grasses  could  not  be  grown  on 
the  open  prairies  and  oak  openings.  Regarding  the  origin  of  this  belief  in 
Illinois,  a  correspondent  wrote  as  follows  : 18 

How  has  Illinois  obtained  the  name  of  not  being’  a  grass  country?  Perhaps  in  this 
wise:  The  emigrant  leaves. New  York,  New  Jersey,  Pennsylvania,  Virginia,  Kentucky, 
or  Ohio,  and  reaches  Illinois,  and  expects  to  make  a  stock  and  grass  farm  in  three  or 
four  years.  The  spring  after  his  arrival  he  breaks  up  one  hundred  acres  of  prairie, 
and  raises  two  crops,  it  may  be  by  a  very  imperfect  system  of  tillage.  The  second  year 
he  sows  a  portion  of  the  one  hundred  acres  in  Blue  Grass,  timothy  or  clover,  forgetting 
or  not  knowing  that  it  is  all  important  that  land  intended  for  permanent  pasture  should 
be  cultivated  a  sufficient  length  of  time  in  corn  and  other  grain  to  effectually  destroy  the 
wild  properties  of  the  soil,  the  wild  grass  and  weeds.” 

It  was  the  general  opinion  among  those  who  succeeded  in  the  cultivation 
of  grass  that  the  failure  of  others  was  owing  largely  to  insufficient  preparation 
of  the  soil. 


MARKETING  OF  WESTERN  HAY. 

Hay  was  baled  and  shipped  from  a  few  localities  by  way  of  the  Mississippi 
River  and  its  branches  to  the  southern  market.  In  the  lake  region,  small 
amounts  of  hay  were  commonly  sold  to  vessels  bound  for  the  lower  lakes  or 

18  Ibid.,  1855,  p.  253. 

14  Ibid.,  1851,  p.  430. 

15Wis.  State  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions  1853,  p.  216. 

16  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1853,  P-  21 3. 

17  Wis.  State  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions  1851,  p.  227. 

18  Ill.  State  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions  (1853-54),  P-  431. 


372 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


for  the  lumber  regions  along  Lake  Michigan.19  W.  G.  Edmundson  in  1852 
described  a  prairie  hay-farm  of  600  acres  in  the  upper  part  of  Lee  County, 
Iowa,  about  15  miles  from  the  river,  which  shipped  in  that  year  700  tons  of 
timothy  hay  packed  in  bales  of  250  or  300  pounds. 

MORE  INTENSIVE  METHODS  IN  THE  EAST. 

The  census  of  i860  reported  a  relatively  small  general  increase  in  the  pro¬ 
duction  of  hay  in  the  States  east  of  Ohio.  The  New  York  production  was 
slightly  less  than  in  1849.  The  territory  west  of  Ohio,  southern  Michigan, 
northern  Illinois,  southern  Wisconsin,  eastern  Iowa,  southeastern  Minnesota, 
and  northwestern  Missouri  was  the  region  of  greatest  increase.  (See  fig.  88.) 
In  the  East,  greater  care  was  being  given  to  the  preparation  and  manuring  of 


Fig.  88.— Hay,  1859.  Each  dot  represents  5,000  tons. 

With  the  disappearance  of  much  of  the  free  public  land  and  the  sub¬ 
duing  of  the  soil  in  the  Great  Lakes  region  the  culture  and  harvesting 
of  hay  increased. 

the  soil.  In  New  England,  farmers  were  ditching  and  draining  low-lands 
suitable  for  hay  production,  and  clearing  the  fields  of  rocks.  “  As  mowing 
machines  are  coming  into  use,”  reports  one  correspondent,  the  stone  digger 
must  prepare  the  way  for  them.”  In  the  West,  the  growth  of  the  cattle 
industry,  together  with  the  inclosing  of  the  prairies,  was  leading  to  an  in¬ 
creased  acreage  of  cultivated  grasses. 

Throughout  the  United  States  in  1840  hay  was  cut  with  the  scythe.  Mow¬ 
ing-machines  had  been  invented,  but  their  work  as  yet  was  unsatisfactory, 
and  only  a  few  were  in  use.20  By  i860,  in  some  sections,  the  greater  part  of 
the  hay  was  cut  by  machines,  in  others  the  appearance  of  a  mower  was  yet  a 
matter  of  comment.  For  raking  the  hay  the  “  common  horse-rake,”  or  the 
“  revolving  wooden  horse-rake,”  was  in  general  use,  except  in  the  rougher 
sections  of  the  East,  where  the  hay  was  still  raked  by  hand. 

19  Prairie  Farmer,  XIV  (1854)*  P-  33&. 

20  Hid.,  IX  (1849),  P-  320;  VIII  (1848),  p.  181. 


Chapter  XXXI. — Potatoes  and  Roots. 


In  1839  the  New  England  States,  New  York,  Pennsylvania,  and  New  Jersey 
were  the  leading  potato-growing  states.  They  produced  over  70  per  cent  of 
the  total  potato  crop  of  the  country.  New  York  alone  raised  30,000,000 
bushels,  Ohio  5,800,000  bushels,  and  Michigan  2,100,000  bushels.  Farther 
West  potatoes  were  generally  grown  only  for  home  and  local  consumption, 
except  by  a  few  farmers  living  in  the  vicinity  of  the  rivers  and  lakes,  who 
sold  potatoes  for  the  southern  market  or  to  supply  the  lumber  trade  of  the 
lake  region.  (See  fig.  89.) 


Fig.  89. — Potatoes,  1839.  Each  dot  represents  100,000  bushels. 

Potatoes  were  a  leading  farm  crop  throughout  the  northeastern  states  in  1840.  They 
were  extensively  used  for  stock  feeding. 

In  New  England  and  New  York  the  potato  was  regarded  as  one  of  the 
most  successful  crops,  and  was  cultivated  extensively  in  southwestern  Maine, 
Vermont,  and  central  New  York.  The  State  of  Maine  was  already  celebrated 
for  its  fine  potatoes ; 1  those  grown  in  the  neighborhood  of  Eastport,  Maine, 
were  regarded  as  of  superior  quality  and  were  sold  as  “  Eastport  potatoes.”  2 
More  than  12,000  bushels  of  potatoes  were  brought  into  Hallowed,  Maine,  in 

1  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1847,  p.  134. 

2  Ibid.,  1845,  p.  200. 

373 


374 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


one  week  in  1843  and  sold  for  shipment.3  Long  Island  and  Oneida  County, 
New  York,  were  other  sections  noted  for  the  exceptional  quality  of  their 
potatoes.4 

Potatoes  were  commonly  grown  in  either  the  first  or  second  year  of  the 
rotation,  upon  sod-land  or  land  which  had  been  in  corn  the  previous  year. 

In  Maine  they  were  frequently  planted  on  burned-over  land  without  ploughing. 
Farmers  with  a  large  acreage  planted  and  harvested  the  crop  with  the  aid  of 
the  plow.  Others  planted  and  dug  the  crop  by  hand.  Some,  after  ploughing 
out  the  potatoes,  picked  up  what  could  be  easily  found  and  then  turned  the 
store  hogs  into  the  field  to  gather  the  remainder.  The  land  was  commonly 
well  manured  in  the  drill  before  planting,  and  frequently  plastered  at  the  rate 
of  about  2  bushels  to  the  acre  as  soon  as  the  potatoes  were  up.5  The  relative 
merits  of  hilling  up  the  plants  and  of  manuring  in  the  hill,  as  compared  with 
level  culture  and  broadcast  manuring,  were  popular  subjects  of  discussion. 
Yields  of  400,  500,  and  even  700  bushels  an  acre  were  frequently  reported.6 

MARKETS  FOR  NEW  ENGLAND  POTATOES. 

1 

After  supplying  the  local  markets,  large  quantities  of  potatoes  were  annu¬ 
ally  hauled  or  shipped  to  seaport  towns  and  sold  for  the  southern  market. 
They  were  also  regarded  as  an  excellent  food  for  livestock,  and  their  cost  of 
production  was  so  low  that  they  were  widely  used  for  that  purpose.  In  New 
England,  about  1840,  potatoes  were  used  as  raw  material  for  the  “home 
manufacture  ”  of  starch.  Hopes  were  entertained  of  enhancing  the  value  of 
the  crop  still  further  by  the  conversion  of  the  starch  first  into  sirup  and  then 
into  sugar.7  Between  1840  and  1845  many  starch  mills  were  established  in 
the  potato-growing  regions  of  Maine  and  Vermont.  In  Somerset  County, 
Maine,  10  were  reported  under  process  of  erection  in  1845,  and  in  Franklin 
County,  20.  A  starch  mill  in  Mercer,  Maine,  was  said  to  have  manufactured 
140,000  pounds  of  starch  of  an  excellent  quality.8  A  correspondent  wrote : 9 

“  So  readily  may  potatoes  be  produced  by  the  mellow  rich  soil  of  the  nothern  counties 
of  Vermont  that  the  price  of  12$  and  18  cents  a  bushel,  delivered  at  the  starch  mill, 
makes  that  one  of  the  most  profitable  crops.  In  many  towns  starch  mills  have  been 
in  operation,  and  it  has  become  common  for  an  ordinary  farmer  to  raise  his  one,  two,  and 
three  thousand  bushels  of  potatoes  in  a  season.”  ( 

THE  APPEARANCE  OF  THE  POTATO  DISEASE— ITS 

RAVAGES.  1 

The  flourishing  potato  industry  of  the  East  received  a  severe  check  in  1843, 
and  following  years,  by  the  appearance  of  a  new  disease,  called  “  the  rot  ” 
or  the  “  potato  disease/’  now  recognized  as  the  late  blight  of  the  potato. 
The  first  distinct  appearance  of  the  disease  that  excited  attention  was  in  1843. 10 
In  that  year  the  potato  crop  of  New  England  was  estimated  at  about  20  per 

3  Ibid.,  1843,  p.  57. 

4  Ibid.,  1844,  p.  203. 

5  N.  Y.  State  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions,  III  (1843),  p.  94. 

G  Ibid.,  I  (1841),  p.  102. 

7  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1844,  p.  77. 

3  Ibid.,  1843,  P-  64. 

9  Ibid.,  1844,  p.  71. 

10  Ibid.,  78. 


POTATOES  AND  ROOTS 


375 


cent  less  than  in  1842,  largely  because  of  “  the  rot.”  In  New  York  and  Penn¬ 
sylvania  the  loss  was  estimated  at  30  per  cent.11 


Table  4 7. — Potatoes’.  Production  in  the  United  States. 
[Source:  U.  S.  Censuses  of  1840,  1850  and  i860.] 


Geographic  division  and 
State. 

1840. 

1850. 

i860. 

Total 

(1000 

bu.) 

Per 

cap¬ 

ita 

(bu.) 

Per 

cent  of 
U.  S. 
total. 

Total 

(1000 

bu.) 

Per 

cap¬ 

ita 

(bu.) 

Per 

cent  of 
U.  S. 
total. 

Total 

(1000 

bu.) 

Per 

cap¬ 

ita 

(bu.) 

Per 

cent  of 
U.  S. 
total. 

United  States  . 

108,298 

6-3 

100.0 

65,798 

2.8 

100.0 

111,149 

3-5 

100.0 

Geographic  Division: 

New  England  . 

35,180 

15-7 

32.5 

19,618 

7.2 

29.8 

21,344 

6.8 

19.2 

Middle  Atlantic  .... 

4L73I 

9.2 

38.5 

24,586 

4.2 

374 

42,307 

5-7 

38.1 

East  North  Central. 

11,885 

4.1 

1 1.0 

I3,4l8 

3-0 

20.4 

27,182 

3-9 

24-5 

West  North  Central 

I  Ol8 

2.4 

.9 

1,236 

14 

1.9 

7,831 

3-6 

7.0 

’MVmntflin 

44 

.6 

.1 

152 

•9 

.1 

Pacific  . 

IOI 

1.0 

.2 

2,256 

5-i 

2.0 

New  England : 

Maine  . 

10,392 

20. 7j 

9.6 

3,436 

5-9 

5-2 

6,375 

10.1 

5-7 

New  Hampshire  . . . 

6,206 

21.8 

5-7 

4,305 

13.5 

6.5 

4438 

12.7 

3-7 

Vermont  . 

8,870 

304 

8.2 

4,951 

15-8 

7.5 

5,253 

16.7 

4-7 

Massachusetts  . 

5,386 

7-3 

5-0 

3,585 

3-6 

5-5 

3,202 

2.6 

2.9 

Rhode  Island  . 

912 

84 

.8 

651 

44 

1.0 

543 

3-i 

.5 

Connecticut  . 

3  414 

11.0 

3-2 

2,690 

7.3 

4.1 

1,833 

4.0 

1.7 

Middle  Atlantic: 

New  York  . 

30,123 

12.4 

27.8 

15,398 

5-0 

234 

26,447 

6.8 

23.8 

New  Jersey  . 

2,072 

5-6 

1.9 

3,207 

6.6 

4.9 

4472 

6.2 

3-8 

Pennsylvania  . 

9,536 

5-5 

8.8 

5,98i 

2.6 

9-1 

11,688 

4.0 

10.5 

East  North  Central : 

Ohio  . 

5,805 

3.8 

54 

5,058 

2.6 

7-7 

8,695 

3-7 

7.8 

Indiana  . 

1,526 

2.2 

14 

2.083 

2.1 

3-2 

3,867 

2.9 

3-5 

Illinois  . 

2,025 

2.3 

1.9 

2,515 

30 

3-8 

5,54i 

3-2 

5-0 

Michigan  . 

2,109 

9.9 

1.9 

2,360 

5-9 

3-6 

5,261 

7.0 

4-7 

Wisconsin  . 

420 

136 

4 

1,402 

4.6 

2.1 

3,8i8 

4-9 

3-5 

West  North  Central : 

\finnPQota  . 

21 

3-5 

2,565 

14.9 

2.3 

Iowa . 

234 

54 

.2 

276 

1.4 

4 

2,807 

4.2 

2.5 

Missouri  . 

784 

2.0 

•7 

939 

14 

i-5 

1,991 

1-7 

1.8 

Ualrnta  T'erritnrv 

10 

2.0 

Nehra 

162 

5-6 

.1 

Kansas  . 

296 

2.8 

•3 

Mountain : 

New  Mexico  . 

a 

5 

Utah  . 

44 

3-9 

.1 

141 

3-5 

.1 

Nevada  . 

6 

.8 

Pacific : 

Washington 

164 

14.1 

.1 

Oregon  . 

92 

6.9 

.2 

303 

5-8 

•3 

California  . 

9 

•  •  •  •  • 

•  ••••• 

1,789 

4-7 

1.6 

*  Less  than  500  bushels. 


The  appearance  of  the  new  crop  enemy  attracted  much  attention,  but  then 
there  were  no  scientists,  in  the  United  States  at  least,  who  could  explain  the 
nature  and  cause  of  the  disease.  Various  theories  were  propounded,  among 
which  insect  origin,  atmospheric  influence,  excess  of  growth  caused  by  ma- 


11  Ibid.,  1843,  pp.  57,  59- 


376 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


nure,  and  seed  deterioration  were  prominent.  “  Premature  ripening  caused 
by  superabundant  moisture  of  the  soil  in  which  they  were  allowed  to  remain 
too  long  ” ; 12  “a  vegetable  cholera  ” ;  “  imperfect  process  of  assimilation  ”  ; 

“  something  in  the  atmosphere  ” ;  were  some  of  the  opinions  expressed.  But 
no  single  theory  appeared  to  meet  all  the  difficulties  of  the  case. 

When  it  was  found  that  many  sections  had  suffered  from  the  new  disease 
in  1843,  it  was  hoped  that  it  might  prove  temporary  and  that  the  loss  was 
owing  to  some  peculiarity  of  that  year  which  would  not  occur  again.  But  the 
attacks  of  the  following  years  were  even  more  severe.  From  Vermont,  in 
1844,  came  the  report: 13 

“  In  the  entire  Green  Mountain  region,  from  the  Berkshires  on  the  south,  to  the 
Canada  line  on  the  north,  there  has  been  such  a  failure  in  the  crop  of  potatoes  that  it  is 
said  there  will  be  none  left  the  present  year  for  the  manufacture  of  starch.” 

The  Patent  Office  Report  for  1844  reported  the  disease  to  have  been  thus 
far  largely  limited  to  the  New  England  States,  New  York,  northeastern  Ohio, 
parts  of  Pennsylvania,  and  as  far  South  as  Virginia.  Maine  suffered  its  first 
severe  loss  in  1845.  By  1848  the  disease  had  reached  Illinois,  Wisconsin,  and 
Iowa.  In  that  year  the  loss  in  New  England  and  the  Middle  States,  while 
considerable,  was  not  so  great  as  in  the  preceding  years.  In  the  Northwestern 
States  the  rot  prevailed  more  than  ever,  Ohio,  Michigan,  Wisconsin,  Iowa, 
and  Illinois  suffering  the  heaviest  losses.14  The  Patent  Office  Report  of  1847 
stated : 15 

“  The  time  was  when  this  crop  was  numbered  among  our  most  successful  ones . 

But  within  a  few  years  there  has  been  a  sorrowful  change,  and  throughout  almost 
the  whole  extent  of  the  country  where  the  common  potato  is  cultivated,  instead  of  ascer¬ 
taining  the  amount  of  the  crop,  our  attention  is  rather  demanded  to  learn  the  amount  of 
the  loss  suffered.” 

From  Kennebec  County,  Maine,  in  1850,  it  was  reported : 16 

“Twelve  years  ago  it  was  estimated  that  more  than  $250,000  were  paid  for  potatoes 
sent  out  of  this  state  by  way  of  the  Kennebec  River  alone.  Now  there  are  not  enough, 
which  are  free  from  disease,  to  supply  the  wants  of  the  inhabitants.” 

DECLINE  OF  POTATO  PRODUCTION  SHOWN  IN  CENSUS 

OF  1850. 

The  potato  crop  of  1849  was  generally  reported  as  much  better  than 
that  of  the  preceding  few  years.  Reports  of  the  time,  however,  corroborate 
the  census  figures,  which  show  that  the  potato  crop  of  the  North  Atlantic 
States  had  decreased  nearly  one-half  since  1839.  (See  fig.  90.)  The  decrease 
was  said  to  be  the  result  both  of  smaller  acreage  and  of  lessened  yields  caused 
by  “  the  potato  rot.”  A  total  crop  of  108,300,000  bushels  was  reported  in  1839 
and  only  65,600,000  bushels  in  1849.  New  Jersey  and  Delaware  were  the 
only  northern  States  east  of  Indiana  showing  an  increased  production.  In 
the  West  there  was  a  small  gain.  The  three  States  showing  the  greatest  in¬ 
crease  were  Wisconsin,  with  982,000  bushels  gain  over  1840,  Illinois,  489,000 
bushels  gain,  and  Kentucky  437,000  bushels. 

™  Ibid.,  61.  ' 

13  Ibid.,  1844,  p.  7 1. 

14  Ibid.,  1848,  p.135.  "  M 

15  Ibid.,  1847,  p.  134. 

16  Ibid.,  1850,  Agriculture,  p.  296. 


POTATOES  AND  ROOTS 


3  77 


In  some  sections  of  the  West,  near  the  Great  Lakes  and  navigable  rivers 
the  potato  was  extensively  cultivated  either  for  the  lake  trade  or  for  the  New 
Orleans  market.  In  Ohio  County,  southeastern  Indiana,  potatoes  were  said 
to  rank  next  to  corn  in  importance.  It  was  not  unusual  for  a  single  farmer 
to  cultivate  40  acres  producing  from  50  to  300  bushels  an  acre.17  It  was  re¬ 
ported  in  1849  that  in  one  day  35,800  barrels  of  potatoes  were  shipped  from 
the  port  of  Louisville,  Kentucky,  nearly  all  of  which  were  raised  within  the 


Fig.  90. — Potatoes,  1849.  Each  dot  represents  100,000  bushels. 

During  the  forties  the  blight  caused  a  general  reduction,  especially  in  the  East  in 
the  potato  crops.  ’ 

immediate  vicinity  of  the  city.  Several  individuals  had  planted  over  100  acres 
each. 


HIGHER  PRICES  FOR  POTATOES  CAUSE  BETTER 

CULTIVATION. 

Not  all  people,  however,  considered  the  prevalence  of  the  potato  disease  as 
a  calamity.  To  the  farmer  the  severity  of  the  loss  was  considerably  mitigated 
by  the  increased  price  received.  From  Oneida  County,  New  York,  in  1854 
there  came  the  following  report : 18 

“  Potatoes  are  successfully  and  somewhat  extensively  cultivated  in  this  vicinity.  Since 
the  commencement  of  the  ‘  potato  disease/  the  aggregate  product  has  been  greatly  re¬ 
duced,  but  the  increased  price  has  continued  to  furnish  remunerating  profit  to  the  pro¬ 
ducer.  While  the  average  [production]  has  diminished  more  than  one-half,  the  price 
per  bushel  has  more  than  doubled,  thus  furnishing  a  greater  return  for  a' much  less 
quantity  of  heavy  cartage.” 

17  Ind.  State  Agric.  Soc.,  1st  Annual  Report  (1852),  p.  142. 

1  U.  S.  Patent  Office  Annual  Report  1854,  Agriculture,  166. 


378 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


A  Rhode  Island  farmer  wrote  in  1849 : 19 

“  Our  farmers  realize  more  for  the  sale  of  potatoes  than  any  other  crop  they  produce 
Previous  to  the  rot,  the  price  was  from  twenty  to  twenty-five  cents  per  bushel ;  but 
since  it  has  ranged  from  forty  cents  to  one  dollar  and^in  some  instances  still  hig  er. 
Average  for  the  last  six  years  not  far  from  sixty  cents. 

By  i860  increased  attention  was  again  given  to  the  cultivation  of  the 
potato  (See  fig.  91.)  New  varieties  were  introduced  and  greater  care 
was  taken  in  the  selection  of  land  and  in  the  cultivation  of  the  crop  Maine 
had  nearly  doubled  her  crop  since  the  census  of  1850.  New  Hampshire  and 
Vermont  reported  about  the  same  production  as  in  1849.  In  Massachusetts, 
Connecticut,  and  Rhode  Island,  on  the  other  hand,  there  was  a  considerable 


FIG.  91.— Potatoes,  1859.  Each  dot  represents  100,000  bushels. 

By  i860  the  potato  crop  was  again  increasing  in  the  East  as  well  as  in  the  West. 


decrease.  Pennsylvania  had  surpassed,  and  New  York  had  nearly  regained, 
the  figures  of  1839.  Farther  west  there  had  been  a  general  increase.  Ine 
total  crop  of  the  country  was  110,600,000  bushels  in  1859  as  compared  wit 
108,300,000  bushels  in  1839.  The  manner  of  culture  in  i860  was  nearly  the 

same  as  in  1840.  t 

Owing  to  lessened  yields  and  higher  prices  after  the  appearance  of  the 

potato  disease/’  the  use  of  potatoes  for  stock  feed  and  for  the  manufacture  of 
starch  fell  off.  One  Vermont  county  reported  in  1853  : 20 

“Our  country  sent  1,000  tons  of  starch  to  market,  before  the  potato  was  diseased.  We 
do  not  now  exceed  20  tons  a  year,  as  only  the  refuse  potatoes  are  worked.  We  orme  y 
raised  300  bushels  per  acre,  but  now  150  is  an  average  yield.  _ _ 


19  Ibid.,  1849,  p.  9 7-  „  .  .  , 

20  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1853,  Agriculture,  174. 


POTATOES  AND  ROOTS 


379 


ROOT  CROPS— CARROTS,  TURNIPS,  ETC. 

While  root  crops  other  than  potatoes  were  not  extensively  grown  in 
1840,  their  culture  was  generally  increasing  in  favor,  especially  in  New  Eng¬ 
land  and  New  \  ork.  The  carrot  was  regarded  as  especially  good  feed  for 
driving  and  teaming  norses  and  for  dairy  cows.  Turnips,  sugar  beets,  ruta- 
bagas,  and  other  loots  were  frequently  grown  in  small  lots  for  cattle,  sheep, 
and  hogs.  The  potato,  however,  was  the  crop  chiefly  used  for  stock-feeding! 

The  occurrence  of  the  potato  disease  ”  and  consequent  increased  selling 
price  of  potatoes  somewhat  stimulated  the  production  of  roots  as  a  fodder 
crop.  The  sugar  beet  was  commended  with  spirit  by  many  during  the  thirties 
the  carrot  during  the  forties.  The  New  York  State  census  of  1855  reported 
the  following  roots  produced  in  the  state  in  the  previous  year  : 


Turnips  . 

Carrots  . 

Beets  . 

Rutabagas  . 

Miscellaneous  Roots 


Bushels. 

985,500 

478,000 

29,000 

3,000 

54,ooo 


As  root  crops  were  commonly  estimated  to  yield  about  500  bushels  an  acre, 
the  table  indicates  only  a  small  acreage.  In  New  England,  turnips  were  com¬ 
monly  sown  in  the  midst  of  the  corn  at  the  last  cultivation,  or  on  land  broken 
up  for  reseeding.21 

The  large  amount  of  labor  necessary  to  produce  root  crops  prevented  their 
coming  into  general  use.  They  were  for  a  time  cultivated  by  many  farmers 
as  a  field  crop,  but  their  extensive  culture  proved  disappointing  and  was  soon 
discontinued.  “  So  large  a  field  as  an  acre  is  rarely  seen,”  22  commented  a 
correspondent  from  Berkshire  County,  Massachusetts,  in  1847.  Another  from 
Ontario  County,  New  York,23  in  1851  reported  that 


“  The  culture  of  roots  in  this  country  is  not  extensive.  Farmers  who  come  to  this 
country  from  Scotland  and  England,  after  a  few  years’  trial,  usually  come  to  the  con¬ 
clusion  that  Indian  corn  is  raised  with  less  labor,  and  will  make  more  fat  than  the 
same  cost  of  roots.” 


21  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1850,  Agriculture,  273. 

22  Ibid.,  1847,  p.  359. 

23  Ibid.,  1851,  Agriculture,  219. 


Chapter  XXXII. — Fruits  and  Minor  Crops. 

In  1840,  apple  orchards  were  to  be  found  throughout  the  agricultural 
region  of  the  northeastern  States.  A  majority  of  the  trees,  however,  were 
native  stock  and  the  surplus  fruit  was  used  largely  for  cider-making  and  the 
feeding  of  livestock.1  New  York  and  New  England  farmers  generally  tried 
to  raise  enough  apples  for  the  consumption  of  their  families  and  to  make  a 
few  barrels  of  cider.2  As  late  as  1838  the  planting  of  apple  orchards  was 
recommended  for  the  single  purpose  of  feeding  the  apples  to  hogs,  to  beef 
cattle,  or  even  to  milch  cows.3  So  plentiful  was  the  supply  of  apples,  and  so 
limited  the  demand,  that  cider  was  frequently  a  drug  on  the  market.4  In  the 
Mohawk  Valley  apples  were  a  source  of  considerable  income.  Both  the  Hud¬ 
son  and  the  Mohawk  Valleys  were  widely  known  for  the  extent  of  their 
apple,  pear,  and  peach  orchards. 

INCREASED  PLANTING  OF  ORCHARDS  AFTER  1840. 

After  1840,  and  in  an  increasing  degree  after  1847,  niuch  attention  was 
given  to  the  planting  of  orchards.  Fruit-tree  nurseries  multiplied  rapidly,6 
interest  was  taken  in  the  formation  of  horticultural  societies,  improved  varie¬ 
ties  of  apples  were  planted,  and  the  old  native  fruit  trees  were  frequently 
grafted.6  By  1850  it  seemed,  indeed,  as  if  every  eastern  farmer  were  planting 
an  apple  orchard.  The  growth  of  cities  was  furnishing  a  market  for  the  fresh 
fruit,  and  the  development  of  transportation  was  improving  the  means  of 
reaching  the  market.  Oneida  County,  in  the  Mohawk  Valley,  it  was  estimated, 
shipped  nearly  18,000  barrels  of  apples  in  1847.7  Wayne  County,  on  the  shore 
of  Lake  Ontario,  was  said  to  have  shipped  more  than  30,000  bushels  of  dried 
fruit  in  1848.8  In  Ohio,  orcharding  was  developing  along  the  shores  of  Lake 
Erie,  and  by  1855  Michigan  was  shipping  fruit.9  As  early  as  1843,  it  was  said 
that  2,000  barrels  of  cranberries  had  been  sent  from  Michigan  in  one  year.10 


PEACH  ORCHARDS  IN  DELAWARE  AND  MARYLAND. 


Other  prominent  fruit-growing  districts  of  this  period  were  Long  Island, 
central  and  southern  New  Jersey,  Delaware,  and  Maryland.11  Delaware  and 


1  u.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1852,  Agriculture,  15 7>  1850,  P*  205. 


2  Ibid.,  1853,  p.  270.  o  on 

*2d  Report,  Agriculture  of  Massachusetts  (1838),  p  141.  ^  „  0 

4  Cultivator,  new  series,  VI  (1849),  p.  23;  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1851, 

Agriculture,  152.  .  TTT  . 

5  N.  Y.  State  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions,  III  (1843),  P-  470- 

c  u  S  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1850,  Agriculture,  274;  1851,  p.  168. 


7  Ibid.,  184 7,  p.  363-  . 

8  Cultivator,  new  series,  VII  (1850),  p.  174- 

9  Country  Gentleman,  V  (1855) »  P-  58. 

i°U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1843,  p.  hi.  . 

11  Ibid.,  (1847),  p.  196;  Country  Gentleman,  IV  (1854),  p.  90;  Cultivator,  new  series,  VIII 

(1851),  P-  92. 

380 


FRUITS  AND  MINOR  CROPS 


381 


Maryland  especially  were  famous  for  the  extent  of  their  peach  orchards. 
Water  transportation  enabled  them  to  place  their  perishable  product  upon  the 
markets  of  Philadelphia,  Baltimore,  and  New  York  within  a  relatively  short 
time.  In  1847  the  peach  crop  of  the  State  of  Delaware  was  estimated  at 
300,000  baskets.12 

Many  large  orchards  had  been  developed.  That  of  Major  Reybold  &  Sons, 
of  New  Castle  County,  Delaware,  was  thus  described  in  1848: 13 

“  Quantity  of  peaches  sent  to  market  (to  the  29th  of  August  inclusive)  by  Major 
Reybold  from  his  Maryland  and  Delaware  orchards ;  .  .  .  .  baskets,  63,344.  Number 
of  baskets  employed  for  transit,  40,000  to  50,000.  Number  acres  of  orcharding,  1,090. 
Number  of  trees  in  orchards,  117,720.  Steamboats  were  constantly  arriving  and  de¬ 
parting  loaded  with  the  produce  of  these  orchards,  which  were  sent  to  New  York  and 
Boston,  as  well  as  to  Philadelphia  and  near  markets.  It  is  probable  that  before  the  close 
of  the  season  as  many  as  80,000  baskets,  if  not  more,  were  thus  disposed  of  from  these 
orchards.” 

The  New  York  Tribune  estimated  the  number  of  baskets  of  peaches  sold 
in  New  York  in  1844  at  12,000  daily  during  the  peach  season.14  In  good  sea¬ 
sons  prices  were  said  to  vary  from  5  to  50  cents  a  basket,  and  in  poor  years 
went  as  high  as  $1.50  to  $3.15 

VINEYARDS  IN  THE  OHIO  AND  MISSOURI  VALLEYS. 

The  manufacture  of  wine  was  receiving  attention  principally  in  the  Ohio 
Valley  and  to  a  less  extent  in  the  Missouri  River  Valley.  Around  Cincinnati, 
Ohio,  then  the  center  of  the  grape-growing  industry  of  the  country,  many  of 
the  roughest  hillsides  were  being  “  trenched  and  benched  ”  for  vineyards.16 
Nicholas  Longworth,  “  the  father  of  successful  vine  culture  in  the  West,”  17 
who  was  the  largest  wine-maker  in  Ohio,  was  reported  in  1844  to  have  a  vine¬ 
yard  of  91  acres,  promising  a  yield  of  nearly  20,000  gallons.18  In  1856  he  was 
said  to  have  bottled  about  150,000  quarts.19  In  1853,  the  Patent  Office  reported 

1.500  acres  of  land  devoted  to  grape-growing  in  Ohio,  200  or  300  acres  in 
Indiana,  and  about  100  (?)  acres  in  Illinois  and  Kentucky,  making  about 

2.500  acres  in  all.  It  was  said  in  1854  that  within  20  miles  of  Cincinnati  some 
1,400  acres  were  planted  to  Catawba,  “the  great  wine  grape.”  20  The  vine¬ 
yards  were  cultivated  chiefly  by  Germans,  many  of  them  from  the  wine  dis¬ 
tricts  of  the  Rhine,  who  found  in  this  industry  a  means  of  employing  the  help 
of  the  entire  family.21  Nicholas  Longworth,  John  Dufour,  and  others  operated 
extensive  vineyards  on  the  tenant  system,  with  newly  arrived  German  immi¬ 
grants  as  tenants.  The  census  of  i860  reported  the  Ohio  Valley  as  the  leading 
wine-making  district  of  the  country. 


12  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1847,  p.  196. 

13  Ibid.,  1845,  PP-  307,  954- 

14  Ibid.,  308. 

15  Ibid.,  1849,  p.  121. 

16  Ohio  State  Board  of  Agric.,  3d  Annual  Report  (1848),  p.  59;  U.  S.  Patent  Office, 

Annual  Report  1845,  p.  937. 

17  U.  S.  Census  of  i860,  Agriculture,  p.  clx. 

18  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Reports  1845,  p.  312. 

19  Country  Gentleman,  VIII  (1856),  p.  20. 

20  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1854,  Agriculture,  265. 

21  Ibid.,  313;  1845,  p.  936. 


382 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


In  1849,  California  ranked  first  in  amount  of  wine  produced,  with  58,000 
gallons,  Ohio  second,  with  48,200  gallons,  Pennsylvania  third,  with  25,600 
gallons,  and  Indiana  fourth,  with  14,000  gallons.22  In  1859,  Ohio  ranked  first 
in  order  of  production  with  568,600  gallons,  California  second  with  246,500 
gallons,23  Kentucky  third  with  179,900  gallons,  Indiana  fourth  with  102,900 
gallons,  New  York  fifth  with  61,400  gallons  and  North  Carolina  sixth  with 
54,100  gallons.  The  total  for  the  country  was  1,618,000  gallons.  The  census 
of  i860  stated : 24 

“  The  cultivation  [of  grapes]  had  spread  over  all  the  western  and  southwestern  States, 
and  we  thought  then  (1850),  as  we  do  now,  that  wine-growing  would  eventually  be 
ranked  amongst  our  most  important  agricultural  interests.  This  the  next  generation 
may  possibly  realize.” 

SPECIAL  CROPS. 

Many  minor  crops  attracted  attention  during  this  period,  some  of  which 
were  tried  out  with  much  enthusiasm.  The  memory  of  the  spectacular  rise 
and  fall  of  the  famous  “  Morus  multicaulis  speculation”  was  fresh  in  mind 
in  1840,  and  was  by  no  means  entirely  forgotten  in  i860.  It  was  still  urged 
that  the  development  of  silk  production  would  provide  a  means  of  utilizing 
the  spare  hours  of  the  women  and  children  on  the  farm. 

About  1833,  much  interest  was  centered  in  the  growing  of  sugar  beets. 
France  was  successfully  manufacturing  sugar  from  beets  at  that  time,  and  it 
was  thought  that  beet  sugar  could  also  be  made  in  America.  Many  farmers 
and  promoters  in  Pennsylvania  and  the  Ohio  Valley  for  a  time  had  visions  of 
a  large  sugar-beet  industry  in  their  home  communities.  After  numerous 
trials,  however,  the  enthusiasm  subsided. 

About  1855  the  United  States  Patent  Office  introduced  sorghum  into  the 
United  States  and  widely  urged  its  production  for  sugar.  Farmers  of  the 
West,  however,  still  remembering  the  Morus  multicaulis  speculation,  were 
distrustful  about  embarking  in  the  new  enterprise,  and  before  the  Civil  War 
it  was  not  widely  tried.  The  production  of  sugar  from  cornstalks  continued 
to  attract  attention,  from  promoters  at  least. 

Broom  corn  was  another  special  crop  which  attracted  considerable  attention. 
Grown  mostly  in  small  patches,  a  part  of  the  corn  was  sold  and  the  remainder 
was  worked  up  into  brooms  on  the  farm  during  the  winter.  A  few  farmers 
went  into  the  business  extensively.  In  the  Muskingum  Valley  of  Ohio,  in 
1845,  one  farm  was  reported  to  have  400  acres  of  broom  corn;  another,  in 
Schenectady,  New  York,  200  acres.  In  the  Connecticut  Valley  in  Massachu¬ 
setts,  broom  corn  was  grown  rather  extensively.25 

TOBACCO  IN  NEW  ENGLAND  AND  NEW  YORK. 

The  early  history  of  tobacco  culture  in  New  England  has  been  discussed  in 
an  earlier  chapter.26  It  was  reported  from  Massachusetts  in  1844  that  on 

22  U.  S.  Census  of  1850,  Agriculture,  p.  lxxxiii;  Census  of  i860,  p.  190. 

23  U.  S.  Census  of  i860.  Agriculture,  186;  Calif.  State  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions,  1858, 

p.  52,  n 3. 

24  Agriculture,  p.  clx. 

25  See  p.  245. 

26  See  pp.  98,  246. 


FRUITS  AND  MINOR  CROPS 


383 


Table  48. — Tobacco:  Production  in  the  United  States. 
[Source:  U.  S.  Censuses  of  1840,  1850  and  i860.] 


Geographic  division 
and  State. 

1840. 

1850. 

i860. 

Total 

(1000 

lbs.) 

Per 

cap¬ 

ita 

(lbs.) 

Per 

cent  of 
U.  S. 
total. 

Total 

(1000 

lbs.) 

Per 

cap¬ 

ita 

(lbs.) 

Per 

cent  of 
U.  S. 
total. 

Total 

(1000 

lbs.) 

Per 

cap¬ 

ita 

(lbs.) 

Per 

cent  of 
U.  S. 
total. 

United  States  . 

219,163 

12.8 

100.0 

199,753 

8.6 

100.0 

434,209 

13-8 

100.0 

Geographic  Division : 

New  England  . 

538 

.2 

.2 

1,406 

•5 

.7 

9,266 

3-0 

2.1 

Middle  Atlantic  . . . 

328 

.1 

.1 

996 

.2 

.5 

9,096 

1.2 

2.1 

East  North  Central. 

8,329 

2.8 

3-8 

12,343 

2.7 

6.2 

40,180 

5-8 

9-3 

West  North  Central 

9  076 

21.3 

4.1 

17,120 

19.4 

8.6 

25,452 

11  -7 

5.9 

Mountain  . 

Q 

.1 

7 

Pacific  . 

I 

4 

New  England : 

Maine  . 

a 

I 

New  Hampshire  . . . 

a 

•  •  •  •  • 

•  •  •  •  •  • 

a 

•  •  •  »  • 

•  •  •  •  •  • 

19 

.1 

Vermont  . 

1 

12 

Massachusetts 

65 

.1 

138 

.1 

.1 

3,233 

2.6 

.7 

Rhode  Island  . 

a 

I 

•/ 

Connecticut  . 

472 

1-5 

.2 

1,268 

3-4 

.6 

6,000 

130 

1.4 

Middle  Atlantic : 

New  York  . 

1 

•  •  •  •  • 

•  ••••• 

83 

•  •  •  •  • 

•  •  •  •  •  • 

5,765 

i-5 

1-3 

New  Jersey  . 

2 

•  •  •  •  • 

•  •••it 

a 

•  •  •  •  • 

•  ••••• 

149 

.2 

Pennsylvania  . 

325 

.2 

.1 

913 

-5 

3,182 

1. 1 

.8 

East  North  Central : 

Ohio  . 

5,942 

3-9 

2.7 

io,455 

5-3 

5-3 

25,093 

10.7 

5-8 

Indiana  . 

1,820 

2.7 

.8 

1,045 

1. 1 

-5 

7,994 

5-9 

1.9 

Illinois  . 

565 

1.2 

•3 

841 

1.0 

•4 

6,885 

4.0 

1.6 

Michigan  . 

2 

1 

121 

.2 

Wisconsin  . 

a 

1 

87 

.1 

West  North  Central: 

Minnesota  . 

30 

.2 

Iowa  . 

8 

.2 

6 

.4 

.1 

Missouri  . 

9,068 

23.6 

4.1 

17,114 

25.1 

8.6 

25,086 

•t 

21.2 

5-8 

Dakota  Territory  . . 

a 

Nebraska  . 

4 

.1 

Kansas  . 

20 

.2 

Mountain  : 

New  Mexico . 

Q 

.1 

7 

.1 

Utah  . 

27 

a 

Pacific : 

Washington  . 

a 

Oregon  . 

a 

1 

California  . 

1 

..... 

’ . 

3 

. 

. 

*  Less  than  500  pounds 


384 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


account  of  the  profit  derived  from  tobacco-growing  in  the  vicinity  of  the 
Connecticut  River  in  the  northern  part  of  the  State,  more  land  was  devoted 
to  its  use  from  year  to  year.  Henry  Watson,  of  East  Windsor,  Connecticut, 
wrote  in  that  year : 27 

“  We  grow  in  this  town  annually  about  three  hundred  tons  of  tobacco,  and  in  the  valley 
of  the  Connecticut  about  five  hundred  tons  are  grown  annually.  The  yield  the  last  year 

(1843)  was  less  than  usual,  1,500  pounds  being  about  the  average  per  acre .  We 

have  two  varieties  of  the  weed,  the  broad  leaf  and  the  narrow  leaf — the  latter  is  about 
two  weeks  the  earliest.” 

Another  reported  that  in  1843  in  the  town  of  East  Windsor  and  in  5  or  6 
adjoining  towns,  within  a  circumference  of  25  miles,  2,500  tons  were  pro¬ 
duced  annually.  The  Connecticut  Valley  tobacco  was  said  to  be  better  for  cigar 
wrappers  than  that  of  the  South.28 

The  Springfield  (Massachusetts)  Republican  reported  in  1845  that  the  culti- 
tion  of  the  tobacco  plant  had  been  very  largely  undertaken  in  that  town  and 
vicinity  within  a  year  or  two.  One  man  was  said  to  have  26  seeded  acres.29 
In  1850  it  was  said  that  800  tons  of  tobacco  were  grown  in  the  Connecticut 
Valley  on  a  tract  extending  40  miles  northward  from  Hartford.  Connecticut 
seed  leaf,  the  principal  variety,  was  said  to  bring,  usually,  double  the  price  of 
the  tobacco  grown  in  Virginia  and  Kentucky. 

It  was  reported  from  Oneida  County,  New  York,  in  1851,  that  several 
farmers  had  been  induced  to  enter  largely  into  tobacco  culture.30  A  farmer 
in  Onondago  County  had  10  acres  in  1847.31  After  1850  the  New  York 
acreage  expanded  rapidly  until  in  i860  it  was  nearly  equal  to  that  of  Connecti¬ 
cut.  Ohio  produced  5,942,000  pounds  of  tobacco  in  1839,  nearly  all  of  which 
was  grown  in  a  few  southeastern  counties.  By  i860,  Ohio’s  production  had 
increased  to  25,100,000  pounds,  a  considerable  portion  of  which  was  produced 
in  the  southwestern  counties. 


HOPS. 

Nearly  1,250,000  pounds  of  hops  were  reported  by  the  census  of  1840.  Of 
this  amount,  over  75  per  cent  was  produced  in  two  very  limited  areas,  one  in 
central  Massachusetts  and  southern  New  Hampshire,  the  other  in  central  New 
York  in  the  vicinity  of  Otsego  and  Madison  counties.  By  i860  production 
had  considerably  declined  in  the  old  hop-growing  region  of  New  England, 
while  a  new  center  was  rising  in  Vermont.  New  York  had  become  the  hop¬ 
growing  State  of  the  Union.  It  produced  nearly  90  per  cent  of  the  total  crop 
of  the  country,  and  over  one-third  of  the  crop  of  this  State  was  in  the  single 
county  of  Otsego. 

27  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1845,  p.  740. 

28  Ibid.,  1844,  p.  101. 

29  Ibid.,  1845,  P-  264. 

30  Ibid.,  1851,  Agriculture,  197. 

81  Ibid.,  1847,  p.  167. 


FRUITS  AND  MINOR  CROPS 


385 


Fig.  93. — Hops,  1859.  Each  dot  represents  100,000  pounds. 


26 


386 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


Table  49. — Hops:  Production  in  the  United  States. 


[Source:  U.  S.  Censuses  of  1840,  1850  and  i860.] 


Geographic  division  and 
State. 

1840. 

1850. 

i860. 

Total 

(1000 

lbs.) 

Per 

1,000 

popula¬ 

tion 

(lbs.) 

Per 

cent  of 
U.  S. 
total. 

Total 

(1000 

lbs.) 

Per 

1,000 

popula¬ 

tion 

(lbs.) 

Per 

cent  of 
U.  S. 
total. 

Total 

(1000 

lbs.) 

Per 

1,000 

popula¬ 

tion 

(lbs.) 

Per 
cent  0 
U.  S. 
total; 

United  States  . 

1,239 

73  ! 

IOO. 0 

3,497 

151 

100.0 

10,992 

350 

IOO.i 

Geographic  Division : 

New  England  . 

588 

263 

47-5 

708 

259 

20.2 

984 

314 

9-' 

OO 

Middle  Atlantic  .... 

501 

III 

40-5 

2,561 

434 

73-2 

9,719 

1,303 

OO.* 

East  North  Central. 

130 

44 

10.5 

187 

4i 

5-3 

259 

37 

2. 

West  North  Central 

I 

2 

.  1 

12 

14 

•4 

5 

2 

. 1 

1 

1 

3 

a 

1 

1 

New  England: 

164 

Maine  . 

37 

74 

3-0 

40 

69 

1. 1 

103 

I. 

New  Hampshire  . . . 

243 

855 

19.6 

257 

809 

7-4 

130 

400 

I. 

Vermont  . 

48 

1 65 

3-9 

288 

917 

8.2 

639 

2,027 

5- 

Massachusetts  . 

255 

345 

20.6 

122 

122 

3-5 

hi 

90 

1. 

a 

1 

a 

2 

a 

•  •  •  •  •  • 

•  •  •  •  • 

C 

15 

.4 

1 

I 

1 

2 

Middle  Atlantic : 

0 

•  *~T 

New  York  . 

447 

184 

36.I 

2,537 

819 

72.5 

9,672 

2,492 

88. 

New  Jersey  . 

5 

12 

•4 

2 

4 

.  1 

4 

6 

Pennsylvania  . 

49 

29 

4.0 

22 

10 

.6 

43 

15 

East  North  Central : 

Ohio  . 

62 

4i 

5-o 

64 

32 

1.8 

27 

12 

Indiana  . 

39 

56 

3-1 

93 

94 

2.6 

28 

21 

Illinois  . 

18 

37 

1-5 

3 

4 

.  1 

7 

4 

Michigan  . 

n 

54 

•9 

11 

27 

•  3 

61 

81 

Wisconsin  . 

a 

4 

16 

52 

•5 

136 

175 

1. 

West  North  Central : 

• 

"N/f  inn  £»cr»ta 

1 

Tnwa  . 

a 

2 

8 

43 

.3 

2 

3 

Missouri  . 

1 

2 

.1 

4 

6 

.  1 

3 

2 

"NT  obra  <;ka 

a 

1 

ICan  sa  s 

a 

2 

Mountain : 

Utah 

a 

4 

1 

14 

Pacific : 

W  a  sh  i  n  crfrvn 

a 

4 

Oregon 

a 

T 

1 

9 

•  •  •  •  • 

California 

1 

a 

.... 

1 

| 

Less  than  500  pounds. 


I 


Chapter  XXXIII. — Beef  Production. 

THE  CENTERS  OF  CATTLE  RAISING  IN  1840. 

The  number  of  cattle  in  the  United  States  was  first  reported  in  the  census  of 
1840.  As  all  cattle  were  reported  together  it  is  impossible  to  separate  the  dairy 
from  the  beef  cattle  in  that  year.  The  leading  cattle  sections  of  the  North 
were  then  New  York,  New  England,  Ohio,  and  the  bluegrass  region  of  Ken¬ 
tucky.  Eastern  and  western  Pennsylvania,  New  Jersey,  parts  of  Maryland, 
and  the  northern  portion  of  Delaware  were  other  important  cattle  areas. 


Cattk  gnizing  was  early  developed  in  the  West.  The  limestone  region  of  Kentucky 
and  the  Miami  and  Scioto  river  valleys  of  Ohio  were  prominent  western  cattle  fattening 
sections.  The  vicinity  of  Chester  County,  Pennsylvania,  was  a  center  in  the  East. 


(See  fig.  94.)  Cattle  were  generally  distributed  throughout  the  agricultural 
regions  east  of  Ohio.  New  York  and  southwestern  Pennsylvania  were  the  most 
prominent  cattle  districts  of  the  East,  and  west  of  Pennsylvania,  Ohio  and 
the  bluegrass  region  of  Kentucky  were  the  important  areas.  In  the  sparsely 
settled  States  of  Indiana,  Illinois,  and  Missouri  cattle  were  abundant  and  the 
proportion  of  cattle  to  population  was  larger  here  than  in  any  other  group  of 
States.  Cattle  were  still  driven  into  the  newly  settled  regions  of  Michigan, 
Wisconsin,  and  Iowa,  as  well  as  into  central  and  eastern  Maine. 


387 


388 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


The  census  of  1850  showed  little  change  in  the  centers  of  the  cattle  industry. 
(Fig.  95.)  In  every  northern  State  east  of  Ohio,  except  Maine,  cattle  were  less 
numerous.  Ohio  reported  a  slight  increase.  In  Indiana,  Illinois,  Wisconsin, 
and  Iowa  cattle  had  increased,  but  not  in  proportion  to  the  growth  of  popula¬ 
tion  nor  to  the  development  of  other  lines  of  production.  Missouri  showed 


Fig.  95. — All  cattle,  1850.  Each  dot  represents  5,ooo  head. 

During  the  forties  there  was  a  general  increase  in  neat  cattle  in  the  western  region, 
chiefly  in  the  corn  and  wheat  growing  regions. 


a  considerable  increase.  On  the  Pacific  Coast,  California  reported  262,700  neat 
cattle,  and  Oregon  41,700. 

BEEF  CATTLE  IN  THE  WEST. 

The  outstanding  centers  of  the  beef-cattle  industry  of  the  country  from 
1840  to  i860  were  the  Scioto  Valley  of  Ohio  and  the  bluegrass  region  of 
Kentucky.  Situated  on  the  eastern  edge  of  the  great  surplus-corn-growing 
area,  these  favored  districts  were  nearer  to  eastern  markets  than  any  other 
of  the  regions  producing  cheap  corn.  Consequently,  they  became  the  leading 
sections  in  the  West  for  the  fattening  of  cattle  before  their  long  journey  over 
the  mountains  to  supply  the  eastern  markets.  Cheaper  feed  was  the  advantage 
which  enabled  the  western  cattleman  to  send  his  livestock  over  the  mountains 
and  still  place  them  on  the  eastern  market  in  competition  with  the  eastern 
feeder. 

The  early  settlers  of  the  Scioto  Valley  had  found  that  although  large  crops 
of  Indian  corn  could  be  raised  with  but  little  labor,  there  was  no  accessible 
and  remunerative  market  for  the  crop.  They  had  therefore  devised  the  plan 


BEEF  PRODUCTION 


389 


of  fattening  large  herds  of  cattle  on  corn  and  then  driving  the  cattle  to  eastern 
markets.  Since  the  year  of  the  first  drive,  about  1805, 1  the  number  fed  had 
gradually  increased,  until  by  1850  it  reached  between  15,000  and  16,000  head 

Table  50. — Neat  Cattle:  Number  in .  the  United  States. 


[Source:  U.  S.  censuses  of  1840,  1850,  and  i860.] 


1840. 

1850. 

i860 

Geographic  division 
and  states. 

Total 

(.thou¬ 

sands'). 

Per 

1000 

popu¬ 

lation. 

Per 
cent 
of  U.S. 
total. 

Total 

(thou¬ 

sands). 

Per 

1000 

popu¬ 

lation. 

Per 
cent 
of  U.S. 
total. 

Total 

(thou¬ 

sands). 

Per 

1000 

popu¬ 

lation. 

Per 
cent 
of  U.S. 
total. 

United  States  . 

14.972 

877 

100.0 

17,779 

767 

100.0 

25  620 

815 

100.0 

Geographical  Division  : 

New  England  . 

D545 

691 

10.3 

1,469 

538 

8-3 

1,573 

502 

6.1 

Middle  Atlantic  .... 

3,304 

730 

22.1 

3,243 

550 

l8.2 

3,631 

487 

14.2 

East  North  Central. 

2,680 

916 

17.9 

3,444 

761 

194 

5,290 

764 

20.6 

West  North  Central. 

472 

1,106 

3-2 

930 

1,057 

5-2 

1,960 

903 

7.6 

Mountain  . 

•  •  •  • 

•  •  •  • 

•  •  •  • 

46 

625 

•3 

128 

733 

.5 

Pacific  . 

•  •  •  • 

•  •  •  • 

•  •  •  • 

304 

2,875 

1-7 

I-363 

3,069 

5-3 

New  England : 

Maine  . 

327 

652 

2.2 

343 

589 

1.9 

377 

600 

i-5 

New  Hampshire  . . . 

275 

968 

1.8 

268 

843 

1-5 

265 

811 

1.0 

Vermont  . 

384 

1,316 

2.6 

349 

I, III 
26l 

2.0 

370 

1,176 

1.4 

Massachusetts  . 

283 

383 

1.9 

260 

i-5 

280 

227 

1. 1 

Rhode  Island  . 

37 

339 

.2 

36 

246 

.2 

39 

224 

.2 

Connecticut  . 

239 

770 

1.6 

213 

574 

1.2 

242 

526 

•9 

Middle  Atlantic: 

New  York  . 

1,911 

787 

12.8 

1,878 

606 

10.5 

D973 

508 

7-7 

New  Jersey  . 

220 

590 

i-5 

211 

432 

1.2 

239 

355 

•9 

Pennsylvania  . 

i,U3 

680 

7-8 

1,154 

499 

6-5 

1,419 

488 

5-6 

East  North  Central : 

Ohio  . 

1.218 

802 

8.1 

1,359 

686 

7-7 

1,635 

699 

6.4 

Indiana  . 

620 

904 

4.2 

715 

723 

4.0 

1,069 

792 

4.2 

Illinois  . 

627 

i,3i5 

4.2 

912 

1,071 

5-1 

1,584 

925 

6.2 

Michigan  . 

185 

872 

1.2 

275 

690 

1.6 

480 

641 

1.8 

Wisconsin  . 

30 

978 

.2 

183 

601 

1.0 

522 

673 

2.0 

West  North  Central : 

Minnesota  . 

•  •  •  • 

•  •  •  • 

•  •  •  • 

2 

329 

•  •  •  • 

119 

693 

•5 

Iowa  . 

38 

883 

•3 

137 

711 

.8 

540 

800 

2.1 

Missouri  . 

434 

1,131 

2.9 

791 

1  160 

4.4 

1,169 

989 

4-5 

Dakota  Territory  . . . 

•  •  •  • 

•  •  •  • 

•  •  •  • 

•  •  •  • 

2 

166 

•  •  •  • 

Nebraska  . 

•  •  •  • 

•  •  •  • 

•  •  •  • 

•  •  •  • 

•  •  •  • 

•  •  •  • 

37 

1,290 

.1 

Kansas  . 

•  •  •  • 

•  •  •  • 

•  •  •  • 

•  •  0  • 

•  •  •  • 

•  •  •  • 

93 

872 

•4 

Mountain : 

New  Mexico . 

•  •  •  • 

•  •  •  • 

•  •  •  • 

33 

536 

.2 

89 

949 

•4 

Utah  . 

•  •  •  • 

•  •  •  • 

•  *  •  • 

13 

1,109 

.1 

34 

847 

.1 

Nevada  . 

•  •  •  • 

•  •  •  * 

•  •  •  • 

•  •  •  • 

•  •  •  • 

•  •  •  • 

5 

798 

•  •  •  • 

Pacific : 

Washington  . 

•  •  •  • 

•  •  •  • 

•  •  •  • 

•  •  •  • 

•  •  •  • 

•  •  •  • 

29 

2,455 

.1 

Oregon  . 

•  •  •  • 

•  •  •  • 

•  •  •  • 

42 

3T39 

.2 

154 

2,938 

.6 

California  . 

.... 

.... 

.... 

262 

2,837 

1-5 

1,180 

3,106 

4.6 

annually.  It  was  reported  in  1849  that  with  the  exception  of  a  few  hundred 
head  slaughtered  and  packed  at  Chillicothe  for  the  English  trade,  all  the  fat 
cattle  of  the  valley  were  driven  East.2  Nine-tenths  of  the  corn-fed  cattle  from 

1  See  p.  177. 

2  Ohio  State  Board  of  Agric.,  3d  Annual  Report  (1848),  p.  162. 


390 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


the  West  arriving  on  the  eastern  markets  about  1850  were  said  to  be  from 
Ohio  and  Kentucky,  but  chiefly  from  Ohio.3  In  some  instances  between  400 
and  600  head  were  fed  by  a  single  farmer  and  driven  to  the  eastern  markets. 
100  head,  however,  was  a  more  usual  number.4 

METHOD  OF  FEEDING  CATTLE  IN  THE  SCIOTO  VALLEY. 

Cattle  feeders  in  the  Scioto  Valley  of  Ohio  and  the  bluegrass  region  of  Ken¬ 
tucky  from  1840  to  1850  usually  divided  their  cattle  into  two  lots  during  the 
feeding  season.  The  animals  which  were  to  be  marketed  the  following  spring 
or  summer  were  put  on  “  full-feed  ”  and  the  remainder  on  “  half-feed/’ 
Those  upon  “  full-feed  ”  were  given  corn  on  the  fodder,  equivalent  to  one-half 
bushel  of  shelled  corn,  and  those  upon  “  half-feed  ”  were  fed  one-half  as 
much.  Two  hogs  followed  a  “  full-fed  ”  steer  and  one  a  “  half-fed  ”  steer. 
It  was  expected  that  each  steer,  when  full  fed,  would  consume  about  60 
bushels  of  corn  during  the  feeding  season.  It  was  the  practice  to  feed  out  the 
corn  on  land  which  needed  manuring.  Corn  was  cut  and  shocked  14  by  16 
hills  to  the  shock.  In  feeding,  a  low  wagon  was  used  to  haul  the  shock  corn 
from  the  field  where  grown  to  the  field  where  the  feeding  was  done.  In 
unloading,  the  wagon  was  driven  across  the  field,  one  man  riding  the  wagon 
and  throwing  the  corn,  alternately  on  each  side,  about  4  stalks  in  a  place  and 
10  feet  apart,  and  so  on  at  each  successive  feeding  until  the  corn,  at  different 
feedings,  had  been  regularly  distributed  over  the  whole  field.  This  method 
of  distributing  the  corn  was  intended  to  furnish  sufficient  room  for  the  cattle 
and  to  give  every  part  of  the  field  a  due  proportion  of  manure.  The  practice 
came  into  the  valley  from  Virginia  and  spread  west  with  the  westward  move¬ 
ment  of  Virginia  and  Maryland  people.5 

Outside  the  Scioto  Valley  there  was  considerable  diversity  in  the  mode  of 
feeding  corn.  Some  graziers  followed  the  practice  of  feeding  down  their  corn 
by  turning  in  both  cattle  and  hogs  to  consume  what  they  wished.  The  fat 
cattle  and  fat  hogs  were  first  admitted  to  consume  what  they  wished,  next  the 
store  cattle  and  store  hogs.  The  more  common  practice,  however,  was  the 
Virginia  method.  Others  pulled  the  ears  from  the  stalks  and  then  pastured 
their  cattle  on  the  standing  stalks.6  In  the  grazing  districts  of  Ohio,  cattle, 
until  3  years  old,  were  generally  kept  running  on  pasture  summer  and  winter. 
The  scant  feed  in  the  latter  season  was  supplemented  from  the  stack  of  corn- 
fodder  from  which  the  ears  had  been  husked. 

The  stock  for  feeding  consisted  mostly  of  four  or  five  year  old  steers.  The 
period  of  feeding  on  corn  was  from  4  to  5J  months.  The  feeding  season  usu¬ 
ally  began  about  the  first  of  November,  a  little  later  or  a  little  sooner  according 
to  the  season,  and  according  to  whether  the  cattle  about  to  be  fed  were  intended 
for  an  early  or  late  market.  The  driving  began  about  the  middle  of  February 
and  continued  until  the  first  or  middle  of  June,  the  drover  arriving  in  New 

3  U.  S.  Census  of  i860,  Agriculture,  p.  cxxxi. 

4  Cultivator,  new  series,  VIII  (1851),  p.  325;  Ohio  State  Board  of  Agric.,  3d  Annual 

Report  (1848),  p.  163. 

5  Beatty,  Essays  on  Practical  Agriculture,  p.  265. 

6  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  (1845),  p.  384. 


BEEF  PRODUCTION 


391 


York  or  other  eastern  markets  between  the  middle  of  April  and  first  of 
August.7  As  to  the  cost  of  driving,  a  writer  in  the  Cultivator  in  1851  stated : 8 

“It  costs  at  a  low  average,  to  get  a  drove  of  cattle  from  the  Scioto  Valley  into  the 
New  York  market,  from  $10.00  to  $12.00  per  head,  without  including  the  loss  of  flesh 
sustained  by  driving,  which  may  safely  be  calculated  at  $10.00  per  head,  reckoning  beef 
at  $7.00  per  hundred  lbs.  which  is  much  below  the  New  York  price.” 

VARIOUS  GROUPS  INTERESTED  IN  THE  FATTENING  OF 

WESTERN  CATTLE. 

The  fat-cattle  business  of  the  West,  as  carried  on  in  1849,  employed  four 
classes  of  persons.  There  was  first  the  raiser  of  cattle,  who  sold  his  animals 
at  1  or  2  years  old,  or  even  3,  to  the  grazier.  The  raisers  were  chiefly  in  the 
great  prairie  regions  of  Illinois,  Missouri,  and  Iowa,  or  in  the  wheat-growing 
regions  of  Ohio.  A  second  class  were  the  graziers,  who  were  chiefly  the  owners 
or  renters  of  large  tracts  of  pasture  land,  notably  in  Madison,  Fayette,  and 
Union  Counties,  Ohio,  on  the  western  edge  of  the  Scioto  Valley.  The  cattle 
feeders  composed  a  third  group.  They  had  farms  in  the  corn-raising  district 
of  Ross,  Pickaway,  Franklin,  and  Madison  Counties,  and  took  the  cattle  in 
the  autumn  and  fed  them  on  corn  till  they  were  fat  enough  for  the  markets 
of  the  Atlantic  cities.  Sometimes  two  of  these  occupations  were  united,  but 
not  often.  The  fourth  class  of  persons  comprised  the  bankers  who  furnished 
the  funds.  The  banks  of  Chillicothe,  Columbus,  and  Xenia  were  said  to  do 
much  of  this  sort  of  business.9  Renick10  wrote  in  1848: 

“  Perhaps  a  majority  of  the  cattle  fed  in  the  valley  are  raised  in  Ohio,  or  at  least 
have  been  in  the  state  one  year  previous  to  the  feeding  of  them;  though  a  considerable 
portion  of  the  number  fed,  are  drawn  from  the  states  of  Indiana  and  Illinois,  and  even 
Missouri  furnishes  a  part ;  though  the  western  cattle  are  generally  too  thin  in  flesh  to  feed 
to  advantage,  unless  they  are  brought  in  the  previous  year ;  but  when  made  fat  they 
are  generally  preferred  by  the  drovers,  (though  not  so  profitable  to  the  feeder),  to  our 
home  raised  cattle,  for  the  reason  that  they  are  better  travellers  and  consequently  will 
lose  comparatively  less  in  weight,  in  the  long  drive  they  have  to  make  to  an  Eastern 
market.” 

GRAZING  IN  NORTHERN  OHIO. 

While  some  cattle  from  north  of  the  National  Road  in  Ohio  were  corn-fed 
and  driven  to  eastern  markets,  by  far  the  greater  number  were  only  grass-fed, 
or  slightly  corn  fed.  They  were  either  sold  to  drovers  from  the  feeding 
regions  to  the  South,  or  were  sent  east  across  the  Alleghenies  where  they 
were  disposed  of  to  eastern  feeders,  or  were  sold  on  the  Boston,  New  York, 
Philadelphia,  or  Baltimore  markets  as  grass-fed  beef.  Many  were  disposed 
of  in  Cincinnati  or  in  eastern  packing  centers.  The  number  of  these  grass- 
fed  cattle  driven  east  from  Ohio  was  much  greater  than  that  of  corn-fed 
cattle.  From  Madison  County  alone,  in  the  grazing  and  feeding  section,  in  7 
months  of  1848,  nearly  20,000  head  of  cattle,  3  years  old  and  upwards,  were 
said  to  have  been  sold  and  driven  mostly  to  the  New  York  and  Pennsylvania 
markets.11 


7  U.  S.  Census  of  i860,  Agriculture,  cxxxi. 

8  Cultivator,  new  series,  VIII  (1851),  p.  325. 

0  Prairie  Farmer,  IX  (1849),  p.  305. 

10  Ohio  State  Board  of  Agric.,  3d  Annual  Report  (1848),  p.  163. 

1 1  Ibid .,  p.  92. 


392 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


In  the  dairy  section  of  the  Western  Reserve  a  few  cattle  were  driven  in  from 
other  sections  to  be  fed,  but  a  large  part  of  the  cattle  slaughtered  consisted  of 
dry  cows,  heifers,  and  steers.12  In  the  wheat-raising  regions  of  eastern  Ohio, 
considerable  stock  was  raised,  grazing  in  the  summer  and  consuming  the  wheat 
straw  or  corn  stover  in  winter.  Some  were  fattened,  but  many,  owing  to  the 
relative  scarcity  of  corn,  were  driven  to  the  Scioto  Valley  or  to  eastern  feeding 
districts  to  be  prepared  for  market.  Gallia,  situated  among  the  hills  to  the 
east  of  the  Scioto  Valley,  was  said  to  be  a  center  for  gathering  lean  cattle  to 
be  taken  to  the  valley  of  the  Scioto  or  to  that  of  the  Ohio.13 

CATTLE  GRAZING  ON  THE  OPEN  PRAIRIES. 

To  the  west,  in  Indiana,  Illinois,  Missouri,  and  Iowa,  the  open  prairies  fur¬ 
nished  abundant  free  range.  Settlement,  as  yet  scarce,  still  clung  to  the  edge 
of  the  prairie  skirting  the  timber.  There  was  still  a  large  range  for  livestock 
in  the  center  of  the  prairie,  which  could  be  occupied  by  all  who  chose  to 
allow  their  cattle  to  graze  upon  it.  Much  of  this  common  grazing-land  still 
remained  in  Indiana,  and  more  to  the  west.  Many  methods  of  stock-feeding 
prevailed ;  but  in  all  the  prairie  regions  range  was  the  important  factor.  Mar¬ 
kets  were  distant  and  hard  to  reach,  and  consequently  the  surplus  cattle  were  of 
necessity  disposed  of  at  a  low  price. 

In  some  prairie  sections  an  extensive  cattle-grazing  business  had  developed, 
as  described  by  a  writer  in  Clinton  County,  Indiana,  in  1853 : 14 

“We  have  in  this  county  a  number  of  individuals  who  are  engaged  in  buying  cattle 
in  small  lots,  and  taking  them  to  the  prairies,  where  they  collect  large  numbers  to  sell 
to  drovers  from  Ohio  and  Pennsylvania.  These  cattle  are  kept  on  the  prairies  in  Indiana 
and  Illinois,  in  the  following  manner:  The  owner  selects  his  location  for  grazing 
early  in  the  spring,  hires  a  man  to  herd  them,  and  furnishes  him  with  a  pony,  and  pre¬ 
pares  a  lot  called  a  *  pound  ’  to  put  them  in  at  night.  As  soon  as  the  grass  starts  in  the 
spring,  he  fakes  his  cattle  to  the  grazing  ground,  adjacent  to  some  farmer  on  the  edge 
of  the  prairie.  He  starts  his  cattle  out  in  the  prairie  early  in  the  morning  by  them¬ 
selves . He  remains  with  them  until  night,  when  he  brings  them  in  and  puts  them 

in  the  pound  for  the  night.  The  cost  of  keeping  a  lot  of  cattle  in  this  manner,  during  the  ( 
summer,  is  the  herdsman’s  wages  and  board,  and  their  salt,  one  hundred  dollars  will 
keep  four  to  five  hundred  head  of  cattle  during  the  summer.” 

• 

WINTER  FEEDING  IN  THE  PRAIRIE  REGION. 

There  were  many  practices  of  feeding  in  the  prairie  region  in  the  winter. 
Some  allowed  their  cattle  to  obtain  winter  sustenance  by  remaining  in  the 
pasture  and  digging  the  grass  out  of  the  snow.  Wintering  around  the  straw- 
stack  was  a  common  practice.  Corn  fodder  and  prairie  hay  provided  other 
available  food.16  Cattle,  until  about  3  years  old,  were  allowed  to  run  winter  and  | 
summer  exposed  to  all  kinds  of  weather.  It  was  common  to  feed  them  a  little 
corn  in  the  spring  to  give  a  good  start  on  the  pasture.  H.  L.  Ellsworth  wrote 
in  1845: 16  | 

“  As  for  sheds,  they  are,  as  yet,  unknown ;  no  large  feeder  has  them,  to  my  knowledge, 
in  Indiana.  It  is  said  that  so  much  shed  room  is  required,  that  it  will  not  pay.  Hence 


32  Ibid.,  4th  Annual  Report  (1849),  P-  52- 

13  Ibid.,  p.  99;  3d  Annual  Report  (1848),  p.  52. 

14  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1853,  Agriculture,  6. 

15  Prairie  Farmer,  III  (1843),  P-  108. 

16  Ibid.,  (1845),  p.  386. 


BEEF  PRODUCTION 


393 


cattle  are  stuffed  with  corn,  and  remain  in  the  open  air  during  all  kinds  of  weather . 

At  present,  farming  is  done  upon  a  great  and  easy  scale,  and  little,  very  little,  attention  is 
given  to  economy;  and  what  is  real  economy  in  the  present  state  of  the  fertile  west, 
where  land  and  stock  are  so  plenty,  is  not  quite  certain” 

BEGINNINGS  OF  CATTLE  FATTENING  IN  THE  CORN  BELT. 

A  large  part  of  the  surplus  cattle  raised  in  the  prairie  region  was  sold  to 
drovers  and  driven  east  to  be  fed  by  Ohio  and  eastern  feeders.  In  the  corn¬ 
growing  region  of  Illinois,  Indiana,  and  Missouri,  however,  after  1850,  a 
considerable  amount  of  stock  was  fattened.  Cattle  were  bought  up  in  the  fall, 
driven  to  the  interior  corn-growing  region,  where  corn  was  cheap,  fed  one 
or  two  winters,  and  then  driven  to  market.  By  1850,  McLean  County,  Illinois, 
was  developing  as  a  western  feeding  center.  A  sample  transaction  of  the 
business  in  this  county  reads  as  follows : 17 

Messrs.  Isaac  Funk  and  P.  Hapoter  of  McLean  County,  a  few  weeks  since,  sold  96 
head  of  beef  cattle  to  a  New  York  drover,  for  $4,383  or  $46.65  per  head.  They  were 
started  for  New  York  the  first  of  April.” 

PACKING  OF  WESTERN  GRASS-FED  BEEF  IN  CHICAGO. 

By  1850,  Chicago  was  developing  as  a  western  packing  center  for  grass- 
fed  beef.  The  Chicago  Tribune  in  1845  was  “  inclined  to  believe  that  Chicago 
was  destined  to  become  the  greatest  beef  market  in  the  United  States,  if  not 
in  the  world.”  It  was  estimated  that  something  like  200  to  250  cattle  were 
slaughtered  in  the  city  daily.  22,000  cattle  were  packed  in  1851,  and  25,000  in 
1852.  By  1850,  Chicago  was  rapidly  coming  to  be  the  outlet  for  a  large  part 
of  the  grass-fed  beef  of  northern  Illinois,  western  Michigan,  and  parts  of 
Iowa  and  Indiana.18 

CATTLE  IN  WISCONSIN  AND  MICHIGAN. 

In  Wisconsin,  but  very  little  attention  had  been  given  to  stock-raising.  Its 
cattle  were  reported  to  be  of  very  ordinary  quality,  brought  originally  from 
Illinois  and  Missouri.19  But  the  failure  of  the  wheat  crop  in  1847  and  following 
years,  and  consequent  increased  attention  to  general  farming,  caused  farmers 
to  give  more  thought  to  cattle  feeding  and  dairying.20  It  seems  to  have  been 
a  general  opinion  that  other  systems  of  farming,  particularly  the  raising  of 
cattle  and  sheep,  even  if  not  more  profitable  than  wheat-growing  in  ordinary 
seasons,  were  less  speculative.  Immigrants  were  bringing  to  the  State  cattle 
of  a  better  quality,21  and  by  1851  the  number  of  cattle  driven  into  the  State 
from  Illinois  and  Indiana  was  said  to  be  decreasing  each  year  because  of  the 
increased  attention  given  to  livestock-raising  at  home.22  In  Michigan,  before 
1850,  cattle  had  been  marketed  at  home  to  immigrants  and  the  lumber  trade, 
but  after  that  date  a  beginning  was  made  in  droving  to  Ohio  and  the  eastern 
markets.23 

17  Prairie  Farmer,  X  (1850),  p.  166. 

18  Ibid.,  p.  382. 

19  Wis.  State  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions  (1851),  p.  146. 

20  Ibid.,  216. 

21  Ibid.,  146. 

22  Ibid.,  201. 

23  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1849,  Agriculture,  183,  185. 


394  AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 

EFFECT  OF  THE  CALIFORNIA  MIGRATION. 

Emigration  to  California  had  a  stimulating  effect  upon  the  cattle  business 
west  of  the  Mississippi.  W.  G.  Edmumson  wrote  from  Keokuk,  Iowa,  in 
1852 : 24 

“  Prior  to  the  California  emigration,  stock  cattle  for  feeding  could  be  bought  at  one- 
half  the  prices  asked  in  Ohio,  but  the  outfit  for  the  overland  route  being  made  almost 
exclusively  along  the  upper  Mississippi  and  her  tributaries,  tens  of  thousands  of  oxen, 
steers  and  cows  have  been  bought  up  at  nearly  eastern  prices,  thus  changing  material  y 
the  market  value  of  stock  cattle  for  feeding.” 

From  Lee  County,  in  the  same  State,  in  1854,  it  was  reported: 25  “  Cattle, 
here,  are  a  great  article  of  trade,  for  home  use,  the  East  and  California. 
From  Marion  County : 26  “  Cattle  are  found  to  be  the  most  profitable  stock 
raised  here.  They  are  sold  mostly  to  California  emigrants.”  From  Cooper 
County,  Missouri,  it  was  reported  in  1849: 27 

“  Our  stall-fed  cattle  are  principally  driven  to  St.  Louis  and  slaughtered.  But  im¬ 
mense  droves  of  3,  4  and  5  year  old  steers,  are  annually  bought  up  in  this  section  and 
driven  to  Illinois,  Indiana,  Ohio  and  Virginia,  there  fattened,  and  then  driven  to  Balti¬ 
more  and  other  eastern  markets.” 

Three  years  later,  however,  a  report  in  different  terms  came  from  the 
neighboring  county  of  Boone.28  “  The  California  trade,  it  observed,  has 
produced  quite  a  revolution  in  the  cattle  trade  of  Missouri.  They  have  ad¬ 
vanced  at  least  200  per  cent  in  price,  and  decreased  in  numbers  in  about  the 
same  proportion.  ’  At  the  same  time  the  cattle  business  was  developing  on  the 
Pacific  Coast.  Calaveras  County,  California,  reported  in  1851 : 29 

“Neat  Cattle ,  Sheep,  and  Hogs  are  raised  on  the  large  farms  for  the  purpose  of 
supplying  the  miners.  They  invariably  feed  upon  wild  grasses  and  acorns,  no  attention 
being  paid  to  them  other  than  is  necessary  to  prevent  their  straying.” 

On  the  Pacific  Coast  the  improved  English  breeds  crossed  on  the  Spanish 
breeds  were  becoming  common. 

THE  EASTERN  CATTLE-FEEDING  INDUSTRY. 

Eastern  Pennsylvania,  New  Jersey,  northern  Delaware,  and  eastern  and 
southern  New  York  had  long  been  the  centers  of  the  eastern  cattle-feeding 
industry.  Formerly  many  eastern  cattle-feeders  had  raised  their  own  stock,  but 
with  the  development  of  better  markets  in  the  East  and  the  opening  of  cheap 
grazing  lands  in  the  West,  and  in  remote  sections  of  the  Eastern  States,  they 
had  come  to  depend  largely  on  the  drovers  for  their  supply  of  cattle..  Cattle 
from  the  grazing  regions  of  the  West,  even  from  beyond  the  Mississippi  River, 
were  driven  east  across  the  Allegheny  Mountains  in  the  fall.  Shorter  drives 
were  made  from  the  grazing  regions  of  northern  and  central  Pennsylvania, 
and  from  northern  New  York  and  New  England.  Natural  conditions,  dis¬ 
tance  from  market,  and  transportation  facilities  were  important  determining 


24  Cultivator,  new  series,  IX  (1852),  p.  364. 

25  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1854,  Agriculture,  13. 

26  Loc.  cit. 

27  Cultivator,  new  series,  VI  (1849),  p.  302. 

28  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1853,  Agriculture,  n. 

29  Ibid.,  1851,  p.  476. 


BEEF  PRODUCTION  395 

factors  in  the  type  of  livestock  farming  pursued.  This  movement  of  cattle  was 
an  important  characteristic  of  the  cattle  industry  of  the  period. 

Western  cattle  arriving  in  the  Eastern  States  in  poor  condition  were  sold  to 
local  farmers,  who  kept  them  over  one  winter,  or  one  year  and  a  winter,  and 
then  disposed  of  them  on  the  market,  usually  during  the  winter  or  spring 
months,  before  the  western  fat  cattle  began  to  arrive.  Stockmen  who  lived 
near  the  large  cities  had  a  decided  advantage  in  being  able  to  drive  their  cattle 
to  market  in  a  short  time,  thus  taking  advantage  of  temporary  rises  in  price. 

IN  CHESTER  COUNTY,  PENNSYLVANIA. 

In  Chester  County,  Pennsylvania,  a  center  of  the  eastern  feeder  industry, 
farmers  were  said  to  find  the  feeding  of  cattle  one  of  the  most  profitable 
branches  of  their  business.30  It  was  usual  for  a  Chester  County  farmer  to 
fatten  from  12  to  20  head  of  cattle  annually.  The  cattle  were  secured  largely 
from  drovers  who  brought  them  in  from  Ohio,  Virginia,  Illinois,  or  from 
northern  Pennsylvania.31  In  an  adjoining  county  in  Delaware  it  was  said  32 
that  the  cattle  raised  consisted  of  “  a  comparatively  few  from  choice  stock  for 
the  dairies,  probably  not  exceeding  one-eighth  of  the  whole  number  in  use.” 
Somerset  County,  New  Jersey,  reported  33  that  “  fifty  per  cent  of  all  our  cattle 
are  raised  in  the  county  ;  the  other  half  are  driven  principally  from  New  York 
State  or  Ohio.”  The  feeding  of  cattle  in  Lancaster  and  adjoining  counties  was 
increasing,  because  with  the  decline  of  distilleries  the  grain  formerly  consumed 
by  them  was  now  converted  into  food  for  stock.34  Throughout  all  the  southern 
counties  of  Pennsylvania  the  feeding  of  cattle  was  a  leading  farm  enterprise. 
In  the  northern  and  central  counties,  on  the  rougher  land,  many  young  cattle 
were  raised.  A  writer  from  Susquehanna  County,  Pennsylvania,  in  1851 
reported : 35  “  Large  numbers  of  young  cattle  are  raised,  and  sold  to  drovers, 
principally  two  and  three  years  old,  together  with  a  fair  amount  of  oxen ;  but 
no  cattle  are  fattened  for  the  city  market.” 

IN  NEW  YORK,  SOUTHERN  AND  EASTERN  COUNTIES. 

In  New  York,  the  southern  and  eastern  counties  carried  on  an  extensive 
cattle-feeding  industry,  drawing  their  cattle  from  the  West  and  from  northern 
New  York.  The  wheat  region  of  western  New  York  also  furnished  many 
lean  cattle  for  the  eastern  feeder.  From  Wayne  County,  in  the  wheat  region, 
in  1849,  it  was  reported: 36  “About  one-third  are  slaughtered  at  home;  the 
remainder  are  driven  to  the  Southern  and  Eastern  counties  to  be  fattened.” 
The  dairy  section  of  New  York,  Oneida  County,  reported  as  follows : 37 

“  Many  are  fed  in  this  portion  of  the  county ;  but  our  farmers  who  turn  their  atten¬ 
tion  to  this  branch  of  business  find  that  they  can  usually  purchase  steers  three  or  four 


30  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1852,  Agriculture,  240. 

31  Ibid.,  1853,  p.  17. 


396 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


years  of  age  at  a  cheaper  price  than  they  can  afford  to  raise  them .  They  are 

generally  obtained  by  picking  them  up  singly  about  the  country,  or  by  purchasing  from 
droves,  which  come  annually  from  the  West,  usually  from  Ohio.” 

From  Herkimer,  a  leading  dairy  county,  in  1841,  the  report  ran : 38 

“  In  the  spring  of  the  year,  large  droves  of  cows  are  brought  here  from  the  eastern, 
western,  northern  and  southern  counties,  and  Canada.  They  are  milked  through  the 
summer,  and  in  the  fall  the  oldest  and  poorest  are  partially  grass  fattened,  and  driven 
to  the  eastern  markets.” 

Throughout  New  York  more  or  less  cattle  were  fed,  but  the  southern  and 
eastern  counties  were  the  leading  cattle-feeding  sections.39 

IN  NEW  ENGLAND. 

In  New  England,  beef  was  generally  produced  in  connection  with  the  raising 
of  steers  for  the  yoke  and  cows  for  the  dairy.  In  Maine,  the  lumbering  indus¬ 
try  furnished  a  large  market  for  working  oxen,  but  as  the  lumbering  region 
receded,40  increased  attention  was  being  given  to  farming  and  to  the  raising  of 
neat  cattle.  “  Five  years  ago,”  states  the  Patent  Office  Report  for  1849, 41 
“  large  droves  of  working  oxen,  principally  for  lumbering,  found  a  market 
in  this  county.  Considerable  numbers  are  now  driven  to  Brighton  (Mass.), 
from  the  central  counties  of  the  State,  yielding  fair  profits.”  It  was  estimated 
that  14,000  cattle  were  received  at  Cambridge  (Brighton  Market),  Massachu¬ 
setts,  from  the  western  and  central  counties  of  Maine  during  the  year  1850. 
From  the  cheap  pastures  of  New  Hampshire  and  Vermont  large  droves  were 
annually  driven  South  to  be  sold  either  at  the  Brighton  Market,  or  to  feeders  or 
dairymen  in  the  three  southern  New  England  States.  In  Massachusetts,  Con¬ 
necticut,  and  Rhode  Island  it  was  the  custom  of  the  farmer  to  buy  a  large  part 
of  his  cattle  from  drovers  coming  down  from  the  north.42  A  writer  from 
Worcester  County,  Massachusetts,  in  1850  stated:43 

“  Fifty  per  cent  of  all  our  cattle  are  raised  in  the  county,  and  the  other  half  are 
driven  in  principally  from  Vermont,  Maine,  and  New  Hampshire.  This  foreign  stock 
is  purchased  late  in  autumn,  principally  for  the  purpose  of  consuming  the  poor  sorts 
of  fodder,  and  to  be  grazed  in  summer,  and  used  to  supply  our  market  with  early  beef.” 

New  England  beef  was  essentially  fed  on  grass,  supplemented,  while  finish¬ 
ing,  with  roots  and  a  little  grain.  A  writer  in  a  Massachusetts  report  of  1849 
gives  the  following  directions  for  feeding  beef  cattle.  It  will  be  noted  that 
corn  was  used  to  a  less  extent  than  in  the  West: 44 

“  After  the  spring  work  is  over,  commence  giving  them  the  best  pasturage  during 
the  summer,  also  the  best  fall  feed  until  they  come  to  the  barn;  then  feed  them  with 
good  hay  and  Indian  meal,  at  first  from  one  to  two  quarts  per  day,  gradually  increasing 
till  six  or  eight  quarts  are  given,  until  they  are  slaughtered,  or  about  fifteen  bushels 
of  meal  to  each  animal.” 


38  N.  Y.  State  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions,  I  (1841),  p.  137. 

39  Cultivator,  new  series,  VIII  (1851),  p.  235. 

40  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1850,  Agriculture,  114;  (1854),  P-  I5- 

41  Ibid.,  1849,  294. 

42  Ibid.,  295. 

43  Ibid.,  1850,  p.  272. 

44  Mass.,  Transactions  of  the  Agricultural  Societies  1849,  P-  88- 


BEEF  PRODUCTION 


397 


DESCRIPTION  OF  THE  BRIGHTON  MARKET. 

The  Connecticut  River  Valley  was  a  center  of  the  cattle-feeding  industry  in 
New  England.45  At  Brighton,  the  great  New  England  cattle  market,  it  was 
said  in  1844  that  $2,000,000  worth  of  hogs,  cattle  and  sheep  were  sold  annu¬ 
ally.46  The  following  account  of  the  Brighton  Cattle  Market  may  help  in 
developing  a  picture  of  New  England  agriculture  in  1840: 47 

“  Thursday  of  every  week,  which  by  common  consent  and  custom  is  the  market  day, 
changes  the  generally  quiet  village  of  Brighton  into  a  scene  of  bustle  and  excitement. 
At  early  morning  the  cattle,  sheep,  etc.,  are  hurried  in  and  soon  the  morning  train 
from  Boston,  omnibuses,  carriages  and  other  ‘  vehicular  mediums  ’  bring  in  a  throng 
of  drovers,  buyers,  speculators  and  spectators ;  so  that,  by  10  o’clock,  there  are  generally 
gathered  as  many  as  two  or  three  hundred  vehicles  in  the  area  fronting  the  Cattle  Fair 
Hotel.  The  proprietors  thereof  throng  the  spacious  bar-room  for  the  purpose  of  warm¬ 
ing  themselves  in  winter,  and  in  summer  ‘cooling  off’ — the  process  for  effecting  both 
results  being  precisely  the  same.  The  portico  of  the  hotel  is  occupied  by  hawkers  and 
peddlers,  who  sell  clothing,  jewelry,  soap,  watches,  knives,  razors,  etc.,  (to  say  nothing 
of  their  customers),  at  astonishingly  low  rates.  An  ‘English  hunting  lever  eighteen 
carots  fine,’  is  frequently  sold  for  five  or  six  dollars,  and,  of  course,  is  a  genuine  article. 
In  the  region  round  about,  ‘  Mammoth  Steer,’  ‘  Living  Skeletons,’  ‘  Snakes,’  etc.,  are  on 
exhibition  at  reasonable  prices. 

“  One  of  the  outside  features  of  the  market  is  the  horse  auction.  A  Brighton  horse 
has  become  a  proverb.  Here  are  gathered  all  the  old,  wornout,  broken-down,  and 
used-up  omnibus,  cart  and  livery  stable  steeds,  and  these  are  knocked  down  (if  they 
don’t  tumble  down,)  at  sums  varying  from  five  to  forty  dollars.  These  sales  are  pro¬ 
ductive  of  a  deal  of  merriment  and  the  mettle,  speed  and  fine  points  of  the  animals 
are  exhibited,  (the  ‘points’  perhaps  being  sufficiently  prominent  already). 

“  All  this  time,  the  butchers  and  the  drovers  are  busily  engaged  in  their  traffic.  The 
fattest  and  best  of  the  cattle  in  the  pens  find  ready  sale,  and  long  before  all  the  drovers 
are  in,  select  lots  begin  to  be  driven  from  the  grounds.  Men  and  boys  hurry  up  and 
down  the  lanes  and  through  the  pens,  each  armed  with  a  stock  which  is  a  sort  of  a 
shillelah,  shouting  to  the  half-crazed  cattle,  and  with  screams  and  blows  directing  them 
where  they  should  go.  Occasionally  a  drove  of  cows  and  calves  come  along,  the  latter 
muzzled,  and  the  former  looing  and  bellowing  in  chorus  to  the  shouts  of  their  drivers. 
Farmers  from  the  neighboring  towns  are  selecting  ‘stores’  from  the  large  number 
of  that  class  in  the  pens,  and  dairymen  carefully  examining  the  ‘  milky-mothcrs  ’  that 
are  so  anxiously  seeking  their  young  from  the  midst  of  their  companions.  Working 
oxen  are  driven  in  by  farmers  from  the  vicinity,  who  sell,  only  after  much  banter,  to 
buy  again  when  prices  are  low.  In  the  midst  of  these,  dogs,  and  goats  and  mules  are 
offered  for  sale,  and  nearby,  are  the  hog  pens,  containing,  at  this  season,  only  stores, 
which  are  sold  singly  and  in  pairs  to  small  farmers,  mechanics  and  others  who  think 
they  can  afford  to  ‘keep  a  pig.’ 

“The  forenoon  is  busy  enough.  At  high  noon  the  huge  bell  of  the  hotel  announces 
dinner,  and  for  a  brief  period  there  is  a  breathing  spell  for  man  and  beast.  After 
dinner,  business  again  resumes  its  sway.  The  voice  of  the  hawker  becomes  hoarse, 
but  it  is  by  no  means  silenced.  Drovers  who  have  not  made  many  sales  get  nervous, 
and  pens  are  cleared  out  without  much  regard  to  profit  on  the  part  of  the  seller.  The 
butchers  begin  to  turn  their  faces  homewards,  and  the  drovers,  generally  with  well 
filled  wallets,  start  for  Boston.  A  few,  not  liking  the  prices,  and  hoping  for  ‘better 
times,’  make  arrangements  to  turn  out  their  cattle  to  pasture,  and  hold  over  to  another 
week.  By  five  o’clock  the  business  of  the  day  is  over,  and  Brighton  subsides  once 
more  into  a  quiet,  matter-of-fact  Massachusetts  village,  till  another  Thursday  brings 
round  another  market  day.” 

45U-S  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1849,  Agriculture,  291,  294;  Country  Gentleman 
XVII  (1861),  p.  410. 

46  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  (1844),  p.  158. 

47  Hawthorne,  American  Note  Books,  in  Collected  Works  (nth  ed.,  1887),  IX  p.  248. 

Reprinted  in  Country  Gentleman,  XVI  (i860),  p.  100. 


398  AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 

WESTWARD  SHIFT  OF  CATTLE  FEEDING. 

By  i860  the  frontier  of  the  cattle  feeding  industry  had  moved  west.  The 
railroads  now  extended  from  the  Atlantic  beyond  the  Mississippi  River.  The 
remote  corn-growing  regions  of  central  Illinois  and  eastern  Iowa  had  become 
cattle-feeding  centers.  Missouri  and  Texas  were  now  the  chief  sources  of 
western  feeder  cattle,  for  Texas  had  advanced  from  the  rank  of  eighteenth 
in  number  of  cattle,  in  1850,  to  first  in  i860.  California,  which  in  1850  was 
twenty-second,  had  in  i860  become  sixth.  (See  fig.  96.) 

Formerly  western  cattle  could  be  put  on  the  eastern  markets  only  during 
the  spring,  summer,  and  fall  months.  The  long  drive  deprived  the  western 


During  the  fifties  the  number  of  cattle  in  the  West  rapidly  increased  as  the  frontier 
was  pushed  farther  west  Cattle  grazing  had  rapidly  developed  on  the  Pacific  coast. 
Before  i860  cattle  feeding  accompanied  general  farming  in  its  extension  westward 
through  the  Ohio  and  Mississippi  valleys. 


grazier  of  the  opportunity  of  taking  advantage  of  temporary  rises  in  prices. 
The  Eastern  feeder  profited  by  such  opportunities,  because  of  his  nearness  to 
market.  After  1850,  however,  western  cattle  were  shipped  by  railroad  to  the 
East  at  all  seasons  of  the  year.  The  eastern  feeder  thus  lost  one  of  his  chief 
advantages.  In  1840,  Baltimore  received  from  the  West  over  the  Baltimore  and 
Ohio  Railroad  432  tons  of  livestock;  in  1850,  14,863  tons,  and  in  1859,  25,184 
tons.48  In  1852  Philadelphia  received  from  the  West  over  the  Pennsylvania 
Railroad,  1,562  tons  of  livestock.  In  1859,  there  were  received  over  the  same 


48  B.  &  O.  Railroad  Co.,  33d  Annual  Report  (1859),  p.  81. 


BEEF  PRODUCTION  399 

road,  private  cars  included,  49,418  tons,  of  which  32,552  tons  were  forwarded 
from  Pittsburg.49 

EFFECT  OF  RAILROAD  TRANSPORTATION  ON  NEW 
ENGLAND  CATTLE  FEEDING. 

By  i860,  cattle-feeding  in  the  southern  New  England  States  had  reached  its 
height  and  in  many  regions  had  begun  to  decline.  The  extension  of  railroads 
was  a  leading  cause.  James  L.  Grinnel,  in  1862,  wrote  as  follows: 60 

“It  was  admitted  all  round  that  owing  to  the  great  facilities  for  bringing  cattle 
from  the  far  west  at  a  low  price,  and  in  great  quantities,  at  all  times  of  the  year,  cattle 
which  had  roamed  on  the  prairies,  costing  the  government  price,  $1.25  per  acre,  and 
fattened  upon  corn  worth  ten  cents  per  bushel — or  distillery  slops  made  at  the  same 
rate — we  here  could  not  compete  on  pastures  worth  $30  per  acre,  and  corn  worth 
75  cents.” 

The  Patent  Office  reported  in  1861  that  the  facilities  for  bringing  in  cattle 
at  all  times  by  railroad  from  the  West  and  other  States  was  so  great  that  the 
business  of  feeding  in  the  East  was  rapidly  declining.51  The  extension  of 
railroads  into  former  remote  cattle-grazing  regions  and  the  increasing  price 
of  store  cattle,  after  about  1847,  made  it  more  difficult  for  the  New  England 
farmer  to  buy  lean  cattle.  Says  a  Connecticut  report  of  1856: 52 

“Neat  cattle  have  decreased  enormously  in  many  of  the  counties  since  1850.  Ten 
years  ago  our  drovers  could  get  a  drove  of  store  cattle,  by  going  out  fifty  or  one  hundred 
miles  west  of  the  Hudson  or  to  Western  Massachusetts,  Vermont,  or  Northern  Penn¬ 
sylvania.  Now  they  go  further  and  often  return  without  them.” 

The  development  of  a  market  for  dairy  produce,  hay,  and  other  crops  was 
furnishing  increased  opportunities  for  the  New  England  farmer  to  change  the 
method  of  disposing  of  his  field  produce.  Dairy  cows  and  working  oxen,  how¬ 
ever,  still  furnished  a  large  supply  of  store  cattle  to  be  fattened  in  the  fall. 

WESTWARD  EXTENSION  OF  RAILROADS  ENDS  CATTLE 
FATTENING  IN  THE  SCIOTO  VALLEY. 

In  Ohio,  the  opening  of  through  railroads  resulted  in  many  changes.  The 
driving  of  fat  cattle  from  the  regions  of  the  Scioto  to  the  eastern  market, 
which  had  reached  its  height  during  the  period  1840  to  1850,  had  almost  ceased 
by  i860.  Cattle  could  now  be  sent  east  by  railroad  from  the  grazing  lands 
of  Illinois  without  stopping  to  be  fed  in  Ohio.  Of  the  cattle  received  on  the 
New  York  market  in  1858,  Illinois  was  reported  to  have  sent  53,500,  Ohio 
37,600,  Indiana  11,100,  Kentucky  9,400,  Iowa  2,700,  Michigan  1,700.  And 
in  addition,  large  numbers  of  western  cattle  were  “  carried  into  New  York 
State  where  they  are  grazed  a  few  weeks  and  then  entered  as  New  York 
cattle.”  53 

Now  that  the  long,  hard  drive  across  the  Alleghenies  could  be  avoided, 
it  was  no  longer  profitable  to  fatten  cattle  to  such  a  degree  as  formerly.  Other 

49  Penn.  Railroad  Co.,  6th  Annual  Report  (1853),  P-  64;  13th  Annual  Report  (i860), 

p.  103. 

50  Country  Gentleman,  XIX  (1862),  p.  61. 

61  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1861,  Agriculture,  258. 

62  Conn.  State  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions  1856,  p.  47. 

53  Chicago  Board  of  Trade,  1st  Annual  Report  (1858),  p.  26. 


400 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


markets  were  also  opened  for  Ohio  corn.  Grass  was  now  relied  upon  to  a 
greater  extent  to  prepare  the  cattle  for  market.  Formerly  from  50  to  75 
bushels  had  been  fed  to  a  fattening  steer  the  winter  before  being  sent  to  mar¬ 
ket  ;  now  25  to  40  bushels  was  a  more  common  amount.  There  was  a  tendency 
to  fatten  cattle  at  an  earlier  age  and  for  a  shorter  period.  In  1858  there  were 
shipped  east  from  Cleveland  124,046  head  of  cattle,  of  which  the  New  York 
market  took  53,652  head  and  the  remainder  went  to  Albany,  Brighton,  or  to 
New  York  State  as  feeders.54 

WESTWARD  MOVEMENT  OF  CATTLE  FEEDING  AND 

GRAZING. 

The  construction  of  railroads,  which  tended  to  diminish  the  feeding  of  cat¬ 
tle  in  Ohio,  contributed  largely  to  the  increase  in  this  branch  of  farming  in 
Illinois  and  other  Western  States.  The  cattle-supply  region  had  been  pushed 
farther  west.  Texas,  Missouri,  and  Iowa  were  now  the  great  cattle-grazing 
States.  Central  Illinois  and  eastern  Iowa  were  developing  as  western  feeding 
centers.  Free  grazing  lands  to  the  South  and  West,  railroad  connection  with 
eastern  markets,  the  temperate  climate,  the  adaptability  of  the  rich  prairie 
grasses  for  grazing,  and  the  ease  with  which  corn  could  be  produced  were 
establishing  this  region  as  a  finishing-ground  for  the  western  packing  industry. 

In  1859,  eight  Chicago  firms  packed  a  total  of  51,606  cattle.55  The  business 
of  a  leading  feeder  of  McLean  county,  Illinois,  was  thus  described  in  1862: 56 

“  [He]  usually  winters  over  from  seven  hundred  to  one  thousand  head  of  cattle,  and 
stall-feeds  for  early  spring  market  from  three  hundred  to  five  hundred  head.  He 
markets  his  stall-fed  cattle  about  the  1st  of  April.  He  buys  cattle  all  the  time,  whenever 
he  can  do  so  profitably.  Those  he  sells  in  the  summer  and  fall  are  generally  three  years 

old . He  prefers  to  buy  cattle  (steers)  the  spring  they  are  two  years  old.  They 

usually  cost  them,  if  good  ones,  from  $18  to  $25  per  head.  These  are  kept  one  summer, 
one  winter,  and  the  half  the  next  summer,  when  they  are  in  condition  to  market,  and 
will  average  from  $45  to  $52  per  head.” 

BEGINNING  OF  CATTLE  DRIVING  FROM  TEXAS. 

In  1854,  Texas  cattle  in  large  numbers  were  driven  north  to  be  fed  in  Illi¬ 
nois.  There  is  a  report  of  a  drive  of  1,500  head  to  Missouri  in  1842,  but  the 
earliest  authenticated  record  of  a  business  venture  of  the  kind  found  by  the 
writer  was  that  of  Edward  Piper,  of  Decatur,  Illinois,  who  in  1846  drove  1,000 
head  of  Texas  cattle  to  Ohio,  where  he  fed  and  sold  them.  From  1846  to 
1861  the  drives  increased.  In  1850,  drives  began  from  Texas  to  California. 
In  1855,  154  head  of  Texas  cattle  appeared  in  New  York;  they  were  said  to 
have  been  brought  by  Mr.  Rankin,  of  Illinois,  who,  after  feeding  them, 
shipped  them  to  New  York  by  railroad.57  By  i860,  Texas  cattle  were  driven 
directly  to  the  packing  market  of  Chicago.  The  cattle  went  through  Missouri 
and  Iowa  to  the  Mississippi  River,  grazing  by  the  way,  and  from  there  were 
transported  by  rail  to  Chicago.58  The  first  drive  of  Texas  cattle  through  to 

54  Country  Gentleman,  XIX  (1862),  p.  12. 

55  Chicago  Board  of  Trade,  Annual  Report  (1859),  P-  59- 

56  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1862,  Agriculture,  333. 

57  Prairie  Farmer,  XY  (1855),  p.  248. 

58  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1862,  Agriculture,  330. 


BEEF  PRODUCTION 


401 


Chicago  is  said  to  have  been  made  in  1856.09  But  by  far  the  larger  number  of 
Texas  cattle  which  went  north  were  fed  in  the  corn  or  grazing  districts  of 
Illinois  or  Iowa  before  being  sent  to  market.60 

TYPES  OF  NATIVE  CATTLE  FOUND  IN  KENTUCKY 

AND  OHIO. 

There  was  great  diversity  in  the  prevailing  type  of  cattle  in  1840.  A  Ken¬ 
tucky  writer  described  the  native  cattle  of  that  State  in  1840  as  a  small,  bony, 
black-haired,  blue-nosed  animal ;  which,  “  nevertheless,  from  long  breeding  for 
its  milk  alone,  had  come  to  possess  a  soft  and  richly  colored  skin  and  fine  hair 
that  some  of  its  betters  might  envy.”  Adam  Beatty  wrote  in  1844  that  the 
improved  breeds  of  Kentucky  were  sent  to  market  when  3  years  old,  but 
the  common  stock  and  half-blood  had  to  be  kept  6  to  12  months  longer.61  The 
native  cattle  of  Ohio  in  1841  were  described  as  “  ring  streaked,  speckled  and 
gray,  with  black,  dun,  yellow  and  bay,  their  quarters  consisting  in  a  big  wiry 
tail,  and  a  sharp  crowning  rump  that  will  take  on  fat  with  the  same  avidity 
as  Pharaoh’s  lean  kine  did  of  old.”  62  Their  weight  at  4  years  old  was  com¬ 
monly  from  500  to  700  pounds.  By  1840,  however,  a  spirit  of  improvement  was 
abroad,  and  no  subject  attracted  more  attention  in  the  agricultural  journals 
of  the  time  than  the  improvement  of  breeds  of  cattle. 

IMPORTATION  OF  IMPROVED  ENGLISH  CATTLE. 

The  fertile  bluegrass  region  of  Kentucky  had  long  been  famous  throughout 
the  land  for  its  fine  stock  of  Shorthorn  cattle.  Another  early  center  of 
improved  cattle-breeding  was  the  rich  cattle-feeding  region  of  the  Miami  and 
Scioto  Valleys  in  south  central  Ohio.  Desiring  a  larger  and  more  economical 
animal,  and  inspired  by  the  work  of  breeders,  in  Kentucky  and  elsewhere, 
several  of  the  leading  cattle  feeders  and  citizens  of  Ross  and  two  or  three 
adjoining  counties  in  Ohio  in  1833  formed  an  association  “  for  the  purpose 
of  promoting  the  interests  of  agriculture,  and  of  introducing  an  improved 
breed  of  cattle  into  this  State.”  63  It  was  called  the  “  Ohio  Company  for 
Importing  English  Cattle.”  The  company  appointed  Felix  Renick,  a  promi¬ 
nent  cattle  man,  to  proceed  to  England  and  “  to  select  and  purchase,  with  less 
regard  to  cost  than  to  their  intrinsic  and  prospective  value,  a  sufficient  number 
of  cows  and  bulls  requisite  fairly  to  introduce  their  breed  into  this  neighbor¬ 
hood.  This  mission  was  highly  successful.”  64 

After  inspecting  the  best  herds  of  England  and  Scotland,  Mr.  Renick 
returned  to  Ohio  bringing  “  some  score  of  animals  ”  of  the  Shorthorn  breed. 
During  the  following  two  years,  other  importations  were  made  bringing  the 
total  number  of  cattle  imported  by  the  Ohio  company  up  to  61  head.  In 
1 836-37  the  object  of  the  society  having  been  accomplished,  the  cattle  which 
it  then  possessed  were  disposed  of  by  public  auction.  Two  bulls  sold  for 

59  U.  S.  Census  of  1880,  vol.  Ill,  Agriculture,  Live  Stock  Supplement,  11. 

60  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report,  1862,  Agriculture,  329. 

61  Beatty,  Essays  on  Practical  Agriculture,  p.  269. 

62  Cultivator,  VIII  (1841),  p.  67. 

63  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1851,  Agriculture,  98. 

64  Ibid.,  1849,  p.  298. 


27 


402 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


$2,500  each,  the  cow  Teeswater  and  her  calf  for  $2,225.65  Importations  in 
increasing  numbers  succeeded  the  operations  of  the  Ohio  company.  Mr.  John 
Powell,  of  Powellton,  Pennsylvania,  was  one  of  the  large  importers  of  im¬ 
proved  cattle.  Up  to  1840,  however,  improved  cattle  were  largely  confined 
to  the  rich  and  the  well-to-do  farmers ;  it  was  not  until  about  1850  that  their 
introduction  became  at  all  general. 

In  New  England  the  farmers  were  nearly  unanimous  in  their  preference  for 
the  common  native  stock,  in  which  the  Devon  blood  predominated.  The  native 
cows  were  said  to  be  good  milking  cattle  and  the  steers  made  good  oxen.  Devon, 
Shorthorn,  Hereford,  Ayrshire,  and  Jersey  cattle  had  been  introduced  and 
crossed  on  the  native  stock.  In  New  York  and  Pennsylvania  improved  breeds 
had  been  introduced,  but  their  influence  up  to  1840  was  comparatively  local. 
In  awarding  the  premium  at  the  New  York  State  Fair  in  1841,  the  committee 
regretted  “  that  a  matter  so  important  as  the  improvement  of  our  native  cows, 

does  not  excite  more  attention . It  is  a  matter  yet  at  issue  whether 

such  crosses  will  not  make  the  most  desirable  animal  for  the  common  farmer. 
Many  farmers  were  prejudiced  against  English  cattle  because  of  the  earlier 
importation  of  “  unimproved  Durham  ”  or  “  Yorkshire  ”  cattle  commonly 
called  “  Hog-hams  ”  or  “  Pumpkin  rumps  ” — names  said  to  have  been  sug¬ 
gested  by  the  peculiar  conformation  of  the  hind  quarters.  These  cattle  had 
proved  unsuccessful,  and  were  deemed  inferior  to  the  native  breeds.60 

By  1850  “  a  commendable  zeal”  was  said  to  be  evident  among  the  New 
England  farmers  for  the  improvement  of  livestock.67  A  difficulty  with  the 
Shorthorns  was  said  to  be  found  in  the  expensiveness  of  their  keep,  and  the 
care  which  they  required.68  In  Maine,  Herefords  were  regarded  as  good  beef 
cattle,  as  well  as  good  oxen.  The  Massachusetts  Agricultural  Society  went  to 
great  expense  to  introduce  the  Ayrshire  breed  of  cows.69  The  Devon,  how¬ 
ever,  was  still  the  favorite  with  the  New  England  farmer,  who  sought  a  type 
of  cattle  that  would  rear  heifers  for  the  dairy,  steers  for  the  yoke,  and  both 
ultimately  for  the  shambles.  A  New  Hampshire  man  writes : 70 

“As  working  cattle  they  [Devons]  are  unsurpassed,  and  from  their  uniformity  of 
color  and  build,  are  easily  matched.  They  are  active,  docile,  and  tractable,  as  well  as 
tough  and  hardy,  and  will  perform  much  hard  labor  without  losing  flesh.” 

Another  writes :  “  The  Devons  readily  appropriate  the  sour  grasses  to  their 
support.  They  do  well  upon  meadow  hay,  and  grow  finely  in  our  old,  sour 
pastures.”  71  In  the  valley  of  the  Merrimac,  the  pure  Devon  was  said  to  be 
more  generally  kept  than  any  other  breed  of  blooded  stock.  They  were  pre¬ 
ferred  by  many  on  account  of  their  color,  a  bright  red.72 

Many  New  England  farmers  insisted  that  the  native  stock,  the  cows  of 
which  were  commonly  regarded  as  good  milking  cattle,  was  as  good  as  any. 
In  the  East,  at  least  during  this  period,  better  feed,  shelter,  and  care  of  the 
native  stock  was  the  greatest  source  of  improvement  in  cattle.  Early  maturity 

65  Ibid.,  1851,  Agriculture ,  101,  102. 

66  N.  Y.  State  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions ,  I  (1841),  pp.  5L  93* 

U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1849,  Agriculture ,  295. 

63  Agriculture  of  Massachusetts,  2d  Annual  Report  (1838),  p.  142. 

09  Ibid.,  55. 

70  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1849,  Agriculture,  295;  1854*  P- 

71  Ibid.,  1854,  Agriculture,  17. 

72  Ibid.,  1849,  Agriculture,  p.  294. 


BEEF  PRODUCTION 


403 


and  a  tendency  to  fatten  were  qualities  wanted  by  the  western  farmer,  and 
consequently  there  the  Shorthorn  soon  came  into  favor.  In  the  East,  however, 
dairy  ing  was  of  greater  importance,  and  more  attention  was  given  to  the 
dairy  breeds  and  the  improving  of  the  native  cattle.  Although  the  Jersey  was  a 

favored  breed,  there  were  less  than  75  purebred  Jerseys  in  Massachusetts 
in  1853.73 

In  the  fertile  pastures  and  milder  climate  of  the  West,  Shorthorn  stock  had 
found  more  favor  than  in  the  East.  In  1849*  the  average  weight  of  the 
fattened  cattle  driven  from  the  region  of  the  Scioto  Valley  was  not  less  than 
100  pounds  per  head  above  that  which  had  prevailed  20  years  before.  West 
of  Ohio  few  of  the  improved  breeds  of  cattle  had  been  introduced  up  to 
i860.  A  drove  of  1,000  head  of  cattle  slaughtered  at  Chicago  in  1850,  pur¬ 
chased  from  Isaac  Funk,  of  McLean  County,  “  averaged  over  650  lbs.  each ; 
and  200  killed  in  one  day  averaged  736  pounds — only  twenty  of  them  being 
over  three  yeais  old.  ‘4  In  1854  Funk  sold  1,400  head  which  averaged  700 
pounds  each.  This  was  said  to  be  a  high  figure  for  so  large  a  number.75  600 
pounds  was  considered  a  good  weight  for  a  good  western  steer  at  3  years  of 

age.  Droves  from  this  region  were  said  to  be  mingled  with  the  improved 
breeds  and  their  crosses.76 

After  1850  the  improvement  of  cattle  progressed  at  a  more  rapid  rate. 
Adaptability  for  a  long  drive  to  market  was  no  longer  a  requirement  in 
regions  having  railroad  facilities.  Of  the  140,534  cattle  received  at  Chicago 
in  1858,  only  21,000  were  driven  in.77  Agricultural  societies  and  agricultural 
fairs  were  a  large  stimulus  to  the  movement.  The  practice  of  buying  cattle 
from  drovers  was  a  great  hindrance. 


OXEN  VS.  HORSES  AS  DRAFT  ANIMALS. 


The  time-honored  discussion  of  the  relative  merits  of  oxen  and  horses  was 
at  its  height  during  the  period  1840  to  i860.  Ploughing  and  hauling  contests 
between  cattle  and  horses  were  leading  attractions  at  the  agricultural  fairs, 
and  much  was  written  of  the  relative  merits  and  costs  of  each  as  draft  animals 
in  the  agricultural  periodicals. 

As  the  census  of  1840  did  not  report  oxen  separately,  there  is  no  statistical 
account  of  their  increase  or  decrease  in  the  years  1840  to  1850.  During  the 
following  decade,  however,  oxen  appear  to  have  been  losing  in  favor  in  the 
East.  In  the  country  as  a  whole  their  number  increased  from  1,701,000  to 
2,255,000,  but  in  every  Northern  State  east  of  Indiana,  except  Connecticut 
and  Maryland,  oxen  decreased.  In  New  England,  where  the  ox  was  in  most 
common  use,  the  proportion  of  oxen  to  horses  in  1850  was  about  3  to  2 ;  in 
i860  they  were  nearly  equal  in  number;  oxen  had  decreased  in  number,  while 
horses  had  increased.  West  of  the  Ohio  the  proportion  of  oxen  to  horses  was 
much  less.  The  number  of  western  oxen  was  increasing,  but  not  so  rapidly 
as  the  number  of  horses.  Oxen  were  particularly  numerous  in  Michigan  and 
Wisconsin,  where  much  lumbering  was  carried  on.  In  Michigan  in  1850  oxen 


7;!  U.  S.  Commissioner  of  Agric.,  Annual  Report  1872,  o.  207. 
,4  Prairie  Farmer,  X  (1850),  p.  382. 

II  XV  (1855),  p.  36. 

'  Ibid.,  IX  (1849),  p.  367. 

77  Chicago  Board  of  Trade,  1st  Annual  Report  (1858),  p.  26. 


404  AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 

had  nearly  equaled  horses  ;  in  Wisconsin  oxen  were  the  more  numerous. 
In  i860  the  number  of  horses  far  exceeded  the  number  of  oxen  in  both  States. 
Farmers  in  the  prairie  region  often  preferred  oxen  for  ploughing,  but  horses 
were  increasing  in  number  much  faster  than  oxen. 

The  oxen  of  New  England  had  long  been  celebrated  for  their  fine  appear¬ 
ance  and  excellent  working  qualities.  The  red  Devon  was  the  breed  preferred. 
Great  care  was  bestowed  upon  their  raising  and  training.  Men  made  a  pro¬ 
fession  of  breaking  steers.  The  attention  of  strangers  in  New  England  was 
often  “  attracted  by  the  noble  teams  of  oxen  which  are  so  frequently  met  with 
in  the  city  of  Boston  and  vicinity . Their  spirited  and  lively  air,  and 


the  brisk  and  springy  walk  with  which  they  moved  along  their  heavy  loads, 
was  a  matter  of  remark.78  In  Rhode  Island  in  1849  most  of  the  farm  teaming 
was  performed  by  oxen,  and  the  manufacturing  teaming  by  horses.  In  the 
north  lumbering  was  carried  on  largely  with  oxen. 

HORSES  REPLACING  OXEN  IN  THE  EAST;  REASONS 

FOR  THE  CHANGE. 

The  horse  was  replacing  the  ox  for  farm  work.  The  reasons  ascribed  for 
this  change  were  many.  For  working  in  the  woods,  or  for  breaking  up  a 
tough  new  sod,  or  for  ploughing  fields  filled  with  rocks  and  stumps,  the 
ox  was  quite  generally  preferred  to  the  more  nervous  and  energetic  horse. 
The  price  and  the  cost  of  keeping  an  ox  was  less  than  that  for  a  horse.  The 
price  of  a  yoke  was  less  than  that  of  a  harness.  The  ox  would  continue  to 


78  Cultivator,  new  series,  IV  (1847),  p.  20. 


BEEF  PRODUCTION 


405 


grow  for  several  years  and  could  be  then  disposed  of  for  beef,  thus  serving  the 
two-fold  purpose  of  working  and  providing  beef.  The  horse,  on  the  other 
hand,  was  more  tractable,  and  worked  at  a  more  rapid  pace.  The  growth  of 
cities  in  the  East  was  causing  an  increased  demand  for  horses.  With  the 
building  of  roads  and  the  movement  towards  a  more  commercial  agriculture, 
more  and  more  of  the  produce  was  sent  to  market,  and  for  work  of  this  kind 
the  horse  was  regarded  as  superior  to  the  ox.  Farming  in  the  East  was  be¬ 
coming  separated  from  lumbering.  Fields  were  being  cleared  of  rocks  and 
stumps,  and  the  sod  was  more  frequently  broken  than  formerly.  Cattle  were 
now  sent  to  market  at  an  earlier  age,  so  that  an  increasing  portion  of  the  cost 
of  raising  the  ox  had  to  be  paid  for  by  the  work  accomplished.79  Still  another 
reason  for  the  change  was  the  increased  use  of  improved  farm  machinery. 
When  used  with  the  cultivator,  the  horse  rake,  and  other  light  machinery, 
the  horse  proved  capable  of  much  more  work  than  the  ox.80  For  the  mowing 
machine  and  reaper  the  horse  was  considered  indispensable.81  Moreover, 
by  i860  things  were  moving  at  a  “  faster  pace,”  the  wages  of  labor  were 
higher,  time  was  more  valuable,  the  more  rapidly  moving  horse  enabled  the 
laborer  to  accomplish  more  work  in  a  day. 

,n  Mass.  Board  of  Agriculture,  8th  Annual  Report  (i860).  Report  of  Secretary  and 
Committees,  274;  Abstract  of  Returns  of  Agricultural  Societies,  125. 

80  Ibid.,  Abstract  of  Returns  of  Agricultural  Societies,  126. 

81  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1863,  Agriculture,  259. 


Chapter  XXXIV.— Sheep. 

The  sheep-raising*  regions  of  the  North  in  1840  were  New  England,  New 
York,  Ohio,  western  Pennsylvania,  and  the  bluegrass  region  of  Kentucky. 
Of  these,  Vermont,  the  Berkshire  region  of  western  Massachusetts  and  Con¬ 
necticut,  and  the  State  of  New  York  were  outstanding.  Vermont  raised  more 
sheep  in  proportion  to  its  population  than  any  other  State  in  the  Union.  Indi¬ 
ana  reported  676,000  sheep.  In  Illinois  and  Missouri  there  were  396,000  and 
348,000  respectively.  Sheep-raising  in  these  sparsely  settled  States  was  usu¬ 
ally  carried  on  in  a  small  way  to  supply  the  domestic  needs  for  mutton  and 
wool.  Few  sheep  were  as  yet  to  be  found  in  Michigan,  Wisconsin,  or  Iowa. 
(See  fig.  98.)  The  census  of  1840  reported  a  total  wool  production  of 


Fig.  98. — Sheep  and  lambs,  1840.  Each  dot  represents  10,000  head. 

The  sheep  industry  had  become  well  established  in  New  England  and 
New  York  before  1840.  After  1830  it  had  rapidly  developed  in  Ohio  and 
western  Pennsylvania. 

35,800,000  pounds  from  19,300,000  sheep,  an  average  weight  of  fleece  of  1.8 
pounds.  The  Cultivator  asserted  that  the  average  was  much  too  low,  and  be¬ 
lieved  that  the  yield  certainly  must  have  been  2\  or  3  pounds  per  fleece,1  a 
figure  which  was  corroborated  by  many  other  contemporary  estimates. 

During  the  thirties,  sheep  husbandry  had  been  pursued  with  great  en¬ 
thusiasm  in  the  Eastern  States.  In  New  England,  attracted  by  the  high  prices 
for  fine  wool,  small  farmers  had  increased  the  number  of  their  sheep,  large 
flocks  had  been  established,  and  dairying  and  grain-raising  had  in  places 
given  way  to  the  sheep  industry.  It  was  asserted  that  in  one  of  the  best  towns 


1  Cultivator,  IX  (1842),  p.  99. 
406 


SHEEP 


407 


of  Berkshire  County,  western  Massachusetts,  about  1837,  some  families  were 
actually  without  bread  for  a  time,  because  farmers  had  turned  all  their  land 
into  sheep  pasture.  There  were — 

persons  for  example  who  worked  for  the  large  wool  farmers.  They  asked  for  money 
for  their  labor ,  but  money  was  not  to  be  had  because  the  clipping  of  wool,  owing  to 
the  derangements  of  business,  had  not  been  sold.  They  asked  to  receive  their  pay  in 
grain ,  but  the  wool  farmer  had  abandoned  all  cultivation  for  the  sheep  husbandry. 
They  asked  for  their  pay  in  pork,  but  the  farmers  who  raised  no  grain  could  raise 
no  pork.”  2 

Throughout  the  sheep-raising  districts  of  New  York  and  New  England, 
flocks  of  from  300  to  1,000  sheep  were  commonly  grazed.3  After  1837  the  price 
of  fine  wool  declined  (see  fig.  29,  p.  219).  By  1840  the  New  York  and 
New  England  wool-growers  were  decreasing  the  size  of  their  flocks  and  turn¬ 
ing  their  attention  to  dairying.4 

WESTWARD  MOVEMENT  OF  WOOL  GROWING,  1850  TO  1860. 

By  1850  the  center  of  the  wool -growing  industry  had  moved  westward. 
(See  fig.  99-)  Ohio  now  led  in  sheep,  the  number  in  that  State  having  nearly 


In  the  old  sheep  regions  of  New  England  and  eastern  New  York  the 
number  of  sheep  rapidly  declined  during  the  forties.  In  New  York  the 
number  decreased  nearly  one-third.  In  Ohio  sheep  nearly  doubled. 
Southern  Michigan  was  developing  as  a  sheep  region. 


doubled  since  1840.  The  census  of  1840  had  shown  that  in  the  Northern 
States  east  of  Ohio  there  were  more  than  twice  as  many  sheep  as  in  the 
region  west  of  Ohio,  but  by  1850  sheep  were  more  numerous  in  the  western 
region.  Ohio,  Michigan,  Indiana,  Illinois,  Missouri,  and  Iowa  showed  the 
greatest  increase  during  the  forties.  Every  State  in  the  East,  except  Pennsyl- 


2  Agriculture  of  Massachusetts,  2d  Report  (1838),  p.  136. 

3  N.  Y.  State  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions,  I  (1841),  p.  143. 

4  Agriculture  of  Massachusetts,  2d  Report  (1838),  p.  45. 


408 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


vania,  showed  a  large  decrease ;  every  State  in  the  West  showed  an  increase 
in  number  of  sheep  (see  figs.  98,  99). 

FURTHER  DECLINE  OF  WOOL  GROWING  IN  NEW  ENG¬ 
LAND  AND  NEW  YORK— CAUSES. 

In  the  region  comprising  New  York  and  the  New  England  States  the 
number  of  sheep  declined  over  63  per  cent  between  1850  and  i860.  The 
reasons  commonly  assigned  by  the  writers  of  the  time  were  the  low  price  of 
wool  and  the  high  price  of  dairy  products.  Among  eastern  wool-growers  it 
was  a  much  discussed  question,  “  How  much  does  it  cost  to  grow  a  pound 
of  wool?”  From  Windsor  County,  Vermont,  in  1848  a  correspondent  ob¬ 
served  : 5 

“The  productions  of  the  dairy  are  increasing  in  the  same  ratio  that  that  of  wool  is 
decreasing,  in  consequence  of  the  low  prices  of  the  latter,  and  the  enhanced  value  of 
the  former . ” 

Another  wrote : 6 

“  The  number  of  sheep  in  our  State  has  been  diminishing  for  several  years.  The  low 
and  fluctuating  price  of  wool  has  contributed  to  bring  about  this  result.  Under  the 
impression  that  the  great  West  would  produce  wool  to  such  an  extent  as  would  depress 
the  price  so  low  that  competition  would  be  impossible,  many  of  our  farmers  prematurely 
disposed  of  their  flocks 

In  Windham  County,  Vermont,  it  was  said  7  to  cost 

“  from  $1.25  to  $1.50  to  keep  sheep  by  the  year.  The  average  of  wool  per  head  will  not 

much  exceed  3  pounds . While  wool  sells  for  40  cents  per  pound,  our  flocks  must 

produce  an  average  yield  of  3  pounds  and  upwards,  or  wool  growing  will  not  yield 
a  profit.” 

From  Claremont,  New  Hampshire,  in  1849  came  the  following  report: 8 

“  This  branch  of  husbandry  rather  flags  in  this  section.  Many  of  our  farmers  are 
discouraged,  and  are  getting  rid  of  their  sheep  as  best  they  can,  selling  them  for  their 
pelts,  or  killing  them  for  mutton.  The  cause  of  this  is  that  cattle-raising  is  found 
much  more  profitable  than  sheep  raising.  Hence  farmers  are  selling  off  their  flocks  of 
sheep,  and  are  going  more  extensively  into  the  breeding  of  cattle  for  the  Brighton 
Market.” 

From  Litchfield  County,  Connecticut : 9 

“The  raising  of  fine-wooled  sheep  is  generally  abandoned  in  this  vicinity,  and  coarse 
sheep,  for  mutton,  have  been  substituted,  which  are  considered  the  most  profitable 
stock  of  the  farmer.” 

In  Franklin  County,  Vermont,  in  1848,  sheep  were  said  to  have  diminished 
15  to  20  per  cent  since  shearing.10  The  Cultivator  of  1849  estimated  that 
within  the  past  2  years  1,000,000  of  sheep  had  been  killed  in  Vermont  for  their 
pelts  and  tallow.* 11  This  was  probably  an  exaggeration,  but  it  shows  the  trend 
of  affairs. 

5  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1848,  Agriculture,  368. 

6  Ibid.,  1854,  p.  28. 

7  Ibid.,  1851,  p.  157. 

8  Ibid.,  1849,  p.  242. 

9  Ibid.,  1851,  p.  179. 

10  Ibid.,  1848,  p.  367. 

11  Cultivator,  new  series,  VI  (1849),  p.  157. 


SHEEP 


409 


Table  51. — Sheep:  Number  in  the  United  States. 


[Source:  U.  S.  Censuses  of  1840,  1850  and  i860.] 


Geographic  division  and 
State. 

1840. 

1850. 

Total 
( thou 
sands) . 

Per 

1000 

popula¬ 

tion. 

Per 

cent  of 
U.  S. 
total. 

Total 
( thou¬ 
sands ). 

Per 

1000 

popula¬ 

tion. 

Per 

cent  of 
U.  S. 
total. 

Total 
( thou¬ 
sands, ). 

Jnited  States  . 

ieographic  Division : 

New  England  . 

Middle  Atlantic  .... 
East  North  Central. 
West  North  Central 
Mountain  . 

19  311 

3,820 

7,106 

3,203 

363 

1,131 

1,709 

1,570 

1,095 

851 

100.0 

19.8 

36.8 
1 6.6 

1.9 

21,723 

2,258 

5,436 

6,831 

913 

381 

33 

452 

385 

1,014 

189 

44 

174 

3,453 

161 

1,822 

3,943 

1,123 

894 

746 

125 

a 

150 

763 

937 

828 

922 

i,5io 

1,037 

5,218 

3ii 

774 

1,210 

3,228 

190 

300 

470 

1,115 

328 

788 

1,991 

1,136 

1,050 

1,877 

409 

13 

780 

1,118 

100.0 

10.4 

25.0 

31-4 

4.2 

1.8 

.2 

2. 1 

1.8 

4- 7 
.8 
.2 
.8 

15.9 

•7 

8.4 

18.2 

5- i 

4.1 

3-4 

.6 

22,471 

1,780 

4,385 

6,912 

1,230 

868 

1,184 

452 

3ii 

752 

115 

33 

117 

2,618 

135 

1,632 

3,547 

991 

769 

1,272 

333 

13 

259 

938 

a 

2 

18 

830 

38 

a 

10 

86 

1,088 

Pacific  . 

lew  England : 

Maine  . 

New  Hampshire  . . . 

Vermont  . 

Massachusetts  . 

Rhode  Island  . 

Connecticut  . 

[iddle  Atlantic: 

New  York  . 

New  Jersey  . 

Pennsylvania  . 

ast  North  Central : 

Ohio  . 

Indiana  . 

Illinois  . 

Michigan  . 

Wisconsin  . 

est  North  Central : 
Minnesota  . 

649 

6l/ 

1,682 

378 

90 

404 

5,H9 

219 

1,768 

2,028 

676 

396 

IOO 

3 

1,294 

2,170 

5,76l 

513 

828 

1,302 

2,107 

587 

1,025 

1,335 

986 

831 

469 

113 

3-4 

3-2 

8.7 

1.9 

.5 

2.1 

26.5 
1. 1 
9.2 

10.5 

3-5 

2.1 

•5 

Iowa  . 

Missouri  . 

Dakota  Territory  .  . 

15 

348 

356 

907 

.1 

1.8 

•  7 
3-5 

Nebraska  . 

Kansas  . 

ountain : 

New  Mexico  . 

378 

3 

6,130 

287 

1.8 

Utah  . 

Nevada  . 

acific : 

Washington  . 

Oregon  . 

15 

18 

i,i57 

190 

.  1 

.  1 

California  . 

*  Less  than  500. 


i860. 


Per 

1000 

popula¬ 

tion. 

Per 

cent  of 
U.  S. 
total. 

715 

100.0 

568 

7-9 

588 

19-5 

998 

30.8 

567 

5-5 

4,96l 

3-9 

2,667 

5-3 

720 

2.0 

952 

1.4 

2,387 

3-4 

93 

•  5 

187 

.1 

254 

•5 

675 

11. 6 

201 

.6 

561 

7-3 

1,516 

15-8 

734 

4.4 

449 

3-4 

1,698 

5-7 

429 

i-5 

76 

.  1 

384 

1 . 1 

793 

4.2 

40 

82 

164 

.  1 

8,877 

3-7 

927 

.2 

55 

876 

1,640 

•d 

2.863 

4.9 

410  AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 

IN  NEW  YORK. 

In  New  York  similar  conditions  prevailed.  From  Washington  County  a 
correspondent  reported : 12 

“Many  who  kept  large  flocks  of  sheep  in  this  county,  have  quit  the  business  and 
gone  into  the  dairy  business,  which  is  much  more  profitable,  for  when  cows  are  rightly 
managed,  it  is  not  uncommon  to  realize  from  $30  to  $40  per  head.  Almost  any  kind  of 
business  will  pay  better  than  growing  wool  at  2\  pounds  per  fleece.” 

Jefferson  County  in  1849  reports  13  that  “  the  low  price  of  wool  and  the 
profits  of  dairy-husbandry  have  done  away  with  most  of  our  sheep  farms.” 
Madison  County,  in  1841  reported  that  Merino  and  Saxony  grade  sheep  were 
kept  in  flocks  from  70  to  100,  and  from  300  to  1,000  on  a  farm,  no  pains 
being  taken  to  shelter  them  in  winter,  except  by  a  few  of  the  best  farmers.14 
In  1848  it  was  again  reported: 15 

“  There  are  some  excellent  flocks  of  sheep  in  this  county,  but  since  the  growing  of 
wool  in  the  far  west  has  been  so  extensively  gone  into,  many  of  our  wool  growers  have 
quit  that  business,  and  turned  their  attention  to  the  dairy.” 

Chautauqua  County  reported  10  that — 

“  The  land  in  this  county  is  as  well  adapted  to  dairying  purposes  as  to  wool-growing ; 
and  as  the  former  business  is  the  more  profitable  it  has  been  largely  increased,  to  the 
neglect  of  the  wool-growing  interest,  which  has  commonly  decreased  in  the  same  ratio.” 

Thousands  of  sheep  were  annually  slaughtered  for  fat  and  tallow.17 

MEDIUM  AND  COARSE  WOOLED  MUTTON  BREEDS  GAIN 

IN  THE  EAST. 

With  the  decrease  of  wool -growing  in  the  East  came  a  movement  away  from 
fine-wool  sheep  to  the  medium  wool  and  mutton  type.18  Medium  wool  had 
suffered  much  less  than  fine  wool  from  the  decline  in  wool  prices  following 
1837.  The  growth  of  population  and  of  wealth  of  the  eastern  cities  was  caus¬ 
ing  an  increasing  demand  for  mutton.  By  1840  the  growing  popularity  of 
Southdown,  Leicester,  and  other  medium  or  coarse-wooled  mutton  breeds  was 
apparent.  Improved  breeds  of  sheep  had  been  introduced  into  the  United 
States  at  an  early  date.  (See  above,  p.  217.)  The  tendency  of  improvement 
up  to  about  1840,  however,  had  been  towards  fine-wooled  sheep.  The  Merinos 
imported  by  Humphrey,  Livingston,  Jarvis,  and  others  had  been  carefully 
bred  in  the  Eastern  States,  especially  in  Vermont.  They  were  widely  crossed 
on  the  native  sheep,  and  thus  the  weight  of  their  fleeces  had  been  greatly 
increased.  In  the  search  for  fine-wooled  sheep  during  the  thirties,  Saxony 
sheep  had  been  introduced  and  crossed  upon  the  Merino  and  native  ewes — a 
step  deeply  regretted  by  most  flock  owners  at  a  later  date.19  Only  a  few  flock 
masters,  and  these  mostly  in  Vermont,  kept  their  Merino  stock  pure.  The 

12  Cultivator,  new  series,  IX  (1852),  p.  80. 

is  u.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1849,  Agriculture,  112. 

14  N.  Y.  State  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions,  I  (1841)  ,  p.  143. 

13  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1848,  Agriculture,  404. 

16  Ibid.,  1849,  p.  243. 

17  Ibid.,  1848,  p.  409. 

is  Cultivator,  new  series,  VII  (1850),  p.  291. 

19  N.  Y.  State  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions,  III  (1843),  p.  445. 


SHEEP 


411 


Saxony,  while  having  a  very  fine  wool,  yielded  a  very  light  fleece,  had  a  small 
body,  and  proved  less  hardy  in  the  northern  climate  than  the  other  breeds. 
In  nearly  all  western  wool-growing  sections  in  1840,  fine-wooled  Saxony  and 
Mei  ino  grades  were  still  in  vogue ; 20  although  in  the  East  they  were  giving 
way  to  the  Southdown,  Leicester,  and  other  coarse-wooled  mutton  breeds. 


Table  52. — Wool:  Production  in  the  United  States. 
[Source:  U.  S.  Censuses  of  1840,  1850  and  i860.] 


Geographic  division 

1840. 

1850. 

1 

i860. 

and  State. 

Total 
(1000  lbs.) 

Per  cent 
of  U.  S. 
total. 

Total 
(1000  lbs.) 

Per  cent 
of  U.  S. 
total. 

Total 
(1000  lbs.) 

Per  cent 
of  U.  S. 
total. 

United  States  . 

35,802 

100.0 

52,517 

100.0 

60,265 

100.0 

Geographic  Division : 

New  England  . 

8,441 

23.6 

7,086 

13.5 

6,578 

10.9 

Middle  Atlantic  . 

13,291 

37.1 

14,928 

28.4 

14,556 

24.2 

East  North  Central... 

5,733 

16.0 

17,254 

32.9 

20,124 

33-4 

West  North  Central.. 

585 

1.6 

2,001 

3.8 

2,779 

4-6 

Mountain  . 

42 

35 

T 

568 

2,922 

Pacific  . 

T 

•9 

4  •  8 

New  England : 

Maine  . 

1,466 

4.1 

1,364 

2.6 

1,495 

2.4 

New  Hampshire . 

Vermont  . 

1,260 

3.699 

3-5 

10.4 

1,109 

3,40i 

2.1 

6-5 

1,160 

3,H9 

1.9 

Massachusetts  . 

s .  z 

942 

2.6 

585 

1. 1 

377 

.6 

Rhode  Island  . 

184 

•  5 

130 

.2 

91 

.2 

Connecticut  . 

890 

2.5 

497 

1 .0 

336 

.6 

Middle  Atlantic: 

New  York  . 

9,845 

27-5 

10,071 

19.2 

9,454 

15.7 

New  Jersey  . 

Pennsylvania  . 

397 

3,049 

1 . 1 
8-5 

375 

4,482 

•7 

8.5 

349 

4,753 

.6 

7-9 

East  North  Central: 

Ohio  . 

3,685 

10.3 

10,197 

19.4 

10,609 

17.6 

Indiana  . 

1,238 

3-5 

2,610 

5-0 

2,552 

4.2 

Illinois  . 

650 

1.8 

2,150 

4- 1 

1,990 

3-3 

Michigan  . 

153 

•4 

2,043 

3-9 

3,96i 

6.6 

Wisconsin  . 

7 

254 

•5 

1,012 

1-7 

West  North  Central : 

Minnesota  . 

a 

20 

661 

2,070 

-3 

Iowa  . 

23 

562 

T 

374 

1,627 

Missouri  . 

1.5 

•7 

<3  T 

1 . 1 

•  Nebraska  . 

3  • 1 

3-4 

Kansas  . 

0 

25 

Mountain : 

•  1 

New  Mexico  . 

33 

9 

T 

493 

75 

a 

.8 

Utah  . 

Nevada  . 

•  1 

Pacific : 

Washington  . 

20 

219 

2,683 

Oregon  . 

30 

c 

T 

California  . 

•  I 

•  4 

1 

0 

4.4 

a  Less  than  500  pounds. 


From  Columbia  County,  New  York,  in  1849  it  was  reported:21 

“  Wool  growers  located  in  the  vicinity  of  our  large  cities  and  towns,  who  have  here¬ 
tofore  bred  fine  Saxony  sheep,  have  to  a  great  extent  within  the  past  five  years  changed 


20  Ibid.,  (1841),  p.  134. 

21  L.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1849,  Agriculture,  244. 


412 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


their  flocks  for  large-framed,  coarse-wooled  sheep,  whose  carcasses  are  valuable  for 
mutton;  and  they  derive  a  great  profit  from  the  Leicester,  Southdown,  and  Cotswold 
sheep,  and  their  crosses  with  the  native  and  other  breeds.” 

From  Rhode  Island  in  1850: 22 

“  Sheep  have  decreased  in  number  very  much,  of  late.  They  are  now  kept,  not  so 
much  for  wool,  as  for  the  rearing  of  lambs,  which  are  sold  to  the  butchers  at  about 
three  months  old,  and  bring  about  $2  per  head.” 

IN  PENNSYLVANIA. 

The  increase  in  sheep-raising  in  Pennsylvania  during  the  decade  1840  to 
1850  occurred  entirely  in  the  western  counties  of  the  State,  while  in  the  central 
and  eastern  counties,  as  in  New  England  and  New  York,  there  was  a  large 
decrease.  In  Washington  County,  on  the  western  edge  of  the  State,  wool 
was  said  to  be  “  perhaps  more  extensively  grown  than  in  any  other  county 
in  the  Union/’ 23  In  the  central  and  eastern  part  of  the  State  but  few  sheep 
were  raised,  and  these  mostly  in  small  flocks  for  domestic  use  or  to  be  sold 
as  mutton  (see  figs.  98,  99).  In  the  southeastern  counties  of  Pennsylvania, 
in  New  Jersey,  and  in  northern  Delaware  many  sheep  were  purchased  from 
western  drovers  in  the  fall  and  fed  during  the  winter  season.24  In  1848  it  was 
said  that  25,000  head  were  annually  driven  into  Delaware  County,  Pennsyl¬ 
vania,  from  the  western  portion  of  that  State,  “  fattened  on  spare  pasture  after 
the  harvest,  and  sold  principally  for  the  Philadelphia  market.”  25 

INCREASE  OF  WOOL-GROWING  IN  THE  WEST. 

While  wool-growing  was  declining  in  the  East,  it  was  increasing  in  the 
West.  In  Ohio  the  number  of  sheep  nearly  doubled  during  the  decade  1840 
to  1850.  East  of  the  Scioto  River,  wool-growing  was  considered  one  of  the 
most  profitable  pursuits.26  In  the  wheat-growing  region  and  in  the  Western 
Reserve  their  number  was  rapidly  increasing.  As  early  as  1830  the  improved 
English  breeds  had  been  taken  into  the  State,  but  Merino  and  Saxony  grade 
sheep  were  more  popular.  It  was  said  that  for  fineness,  the  wool  staple  grown 
in  the  western  counties  bordering  on  the  Ohio  River  could  not  be  excelled 
in  any  other  portion  of  the  Union.27  Merino  bucks  in  large  numbers  were 
imported  from  the  best  Vermont  flocks.  A  notable  flock  was  that  of  Wells 
&  Dickinson,  of  Steubenville,  established  in  1806,  which  became  one  of  the 
most  celebrated  in  the  United  States  and  a  source  of  improved  sheep  for 
Ohio  and  western  wool-growers.28 

By  1849,  however,  it  was  reported  29  from  Green  County,  Ohio,  that — 

“a  tide  is  now  setting  in,  in  favor  of  long  coarse  wool,  as  the  merchants  pay  nearly 
as  much  for  it  as  for  fine  and  on  account  of  the  mutton  properties  of  the  long  wooled 
sheep,  the  true  policy  of  wool-growers  is  to  produce  such  wool  as  the  wants  of  the 

22  u.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1850,  Agriculture ,  477. 

23  Ibid.,  1849,  p.  256. 

24  Ibid.,  1850,  p.  306 ;  1852,  p.  172. 

25  Ibid.,  1848,  p.  450.  , 

26  Ibid.,  1850,  p.  392;  Ohio  State  Board  of  Agric.,  1st  Annual  Report  (1846),  p.  7. 

27  Ohio  State  Bd.  of  Agric.,  1st  Annual  Report  (1846),  p.  30. 

28  Cultivator,  new  series,  V  (1848),  p.  10. 

28  Ohio  State  Bd.  of  Agric.,  4th  Annual  Report  (1849),  p.  106. 


SHEEP  413 

country  demand,  and  that  will  be  but  a  small  amount  of  the  very  fine,  and  an  equally 
small  amount  of  the  coarse,  hairy  Leicester  and  others  of  a  similar  grade." 

In  Ohio,  as  in  Vermont,  large  numbers  of  sheep  were  slaughtered  for  their 
pelts  and  tallow ; ,i0  but  in  the  former  State  it  was  regarded  as  a  question 
whether  on  the  cheap  and  productive  pastures  sheep  could  not  be  profitably 
raised  for  this  purpose  alone.31 

In  Michigan,  where  the  number  of  sheep  was  rapidly  increasing,  wool¬ 
growing  was  second  only  to  wheat-raising  as  the  chief  business  of  the  farmers, 
and  those  who  gave  it  proper  attention  were  said  to  be  reaping  even  a  richer 
reward  than  those  who  confined  themselves  to  the  great  staple,  wheat.32  With 
the  opening  of  the  railroads,  sheep  for  mutton  began  to  be  sent  to  the  eastern 
markets.33 


WOOL-GROWING  ON  THE  PRAIRIES. 

West  of  Ohio  but  few  farmers  had  begun  sheep-raising  as  a  business  before 
1840.  Many  kept  flocks  of  100  or  less  for  domestic  purposes,  but  not  for  the 
sale  of  wool.  But  as  the  settlement  of  the  prairies,  which  had  well  begun  by 
1840,  became  increasingly  dense,  farmers,  in  seeking  for  a  marketable  staple, 
began  to  turn  their  attention  to  wool.  The  free  range  of  the  prairie  furnished 
abundant  food ;  wool  with  a  high  specific  value  was  easily  sent  to  the  distant 
eastern  market.34  Adam  Beatty  expressed  the  opinion  of  many  in  the  West 
in  the  American  Agriculturist ,35  in  1845.  He  wrote: 

“  The  difficulty  of  finding  an  adequate  market  for  our  rapidly  increasing  agricultural 
products,  renders  it  necessary  that  we  should  avail  ourselves  of  as  many  new  sources 
for  the  profitable  employment  of  land  and  labor  as  possible.  Nothing,  in  our  present 
circumstances,  is  better  calculated  for  this  purpose,  than  sheep  husbandry.  We  have 
land  in  great  abundance,  whilst  labor  is  comparatively  scarce.  Sheep  husbandry  re¬ 
quires  much  land,  and  is  attended  with  the  advantages  of  requiring  comparatively  few 
laborers,  and,  instead  of  exhausting,  tends  greatly  to  fertilize  the  land  thus  appro¬ 
priated." 

In  the  minds  of  many  of  the  early  settlers  of  the  West,  who  were  acquainted 
with  the  rough,  hilly  sheep-raising  section  of  the  East,  the  impression  pre¬ 
vailed  that  the  western  climate  and  prairie  lands  were  not  adapted  to  the 
raising  of  wool.  It  was  assumed  that  “  the  prairies  are  too  level  for  sheep ; 
affording  no  protection  against  winds  or  chance  for  climbing.”  36  Prairie  and 
timber  wolves  proved  a  source  of  considerable  loss  to  the  early  flocks.37  In¬ 
creased  interest  in  sheep,  however,  caused  the  publication  of  statements  by 
many  men  who  had  been  long  engaged  in  wool-growing,  notably  George 
Flower,  of  Edwards  County,  Illinois,  who  had  been  breeding  sheep  in  that 
county  since  1817.38  These  reports  helped  to  overcome  the  belief  among  the 
settlers  on  the  prairie  region  that  sheep  could  not  be  made  to  thrive.39 

30  Cultivator,  new  series,  VI  (1849),  P-  157- 

31  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1845,  p.  338. 

32  Ibid.,  1852,  Agriculture,  281 ;  (1850),  p.  330. 

33  Ibid.,  1852,  Agriculture,  275. 

34  Prairie  Farmer,  IV  (1844),  p.  274;  III  (1843),  p.  207. 

35  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1845,  p.  1013. 

36 Prairie  Farmer,  III  (1843),  p.  2?8. 

87  Ibid.,  VII  (1847),  p.213. 

33  Foe  cit 

"Ibid.,  Ill  (1843),  P.238. 


t 


414  AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 

DRIVING  SHEEP  WESTWARD. 

While  the  eastern  wool-growers  in  the  early  forties  were  asking,  “  How 
much  does  it  cost  to  grow  a  pound  of  wool?”  the  farmer  of  the  Western 
States  was  asking,  “  How,  when  and  where  can  I  obtain  a  drove  of  sheep?  ”  40 
The  prairie  farmer  or  newly  arrived  immigrant  in  this  newly  settled  region 
sought  a  flock  of  sheep  with  which  to  begin  wool-growing.  Sheep  were  in 
demand;  but  they  were  not  to  be  had  except  in  small  numbers,  of  a  poor 
quality,  and  at  high  prices.41  The  driving  of  large  flocks  of  sheep  from  Ohio 
and  Pennsylvania  and  other  old  sheep-raising  regions  into  the  newly  settled 
region  of  Illinois,  Missouri,  Iowa,  and  Wisconsin  began.  By  1843  sheep  were 
said  to  be  pressing  westward  at  an  “  enormous  rate.” 

A  farmer  in  Kane  County,  Illinois,  in  1843  wrote  to  a  wool-grower  near 
Pittsburg,  Pennsylvania,  “that  he  would  be  glad  to  take  1,000  sheep  and 
give  the  owner  all  the  wool,  reserving  to  himself  the  increase  of  the  flock  for 
the  keeping,  or  he  would  give  the  increase  and  take  the  wool  for  the  keep¬ 
ing.”  42  Others,  possessing  capital,  brought  sheep  by  the  thousands  to  the 
prairies  and  loaned  them  to  settlers  on  contract  “  to  pay  one  and  a  half  to  two 
pounds  of  wool  annually  per  head  and  to  return  a  flock  equal  in  all  respects 
after  a  term  of  years.”  43 

SHEEP  DRIVING  FROM  CENTRAL  OHIO  TO  CHICAGO 

IN  1843. 

Solon  Robinson,  in  1844,  *n  an  article  in  the  Prairie  Farmer ,44  under  the 
heading,  “  When,  where,  and  how  to  get  a  drove  of  sheep,”  states  that  “  The 
nearest  point  where  sheep  can  be  bought  to  good  advantage,  is  in  some  of  the 
central  counties  of  Ohio.”  These  counties  were  about  300  miles  distant  from 
Chicago.  He  writes  further  regarding  a  drive : 45 

“I  left  home  last  year  the  last  of  August,  with  one  man  and  a  boy  12  years  old;  I 
was  absent  37  days,  and  brought  in  about  800  head  of  ‘  good  common  ’  sheep ;  that  is, 
an  average  of  about  half-blood  Merino.  I  bought  in  Champaign  and  Clark  Counties, 
(Ohio),  on  the  waters  of  Mad  River.  The  prices  varied  from  50  to  87!  cents,  and 

averaged  upon  the  500  which  I  bought  myself,  661  cents .  It  may  safely  be  said 

that  one  can  go  from  Chicago  to  Ohio  and  bring  in  from  500  to  800  head  of  sheep,  at 
25  cents  a  head,  and  that  a  good  lot  will  cost  less  than  70  cents  a  head . 

“  Distance  from  Chicago,  300  miles ;  the  route,  by  La  Porte,  South  Bend,  Goshen, 
and  Fort  Wayne,  Ind.,  Wiltshire,  St.  Mary’s,  Sidney,  Urbana,  Springfield,  etc. ;  or  else 
from  St.  Mary’s  bear  more  east  through  Logan,  Union  and  Delaware  Counties  of  Ohio. 
Another  route  is  through  Michigan  by  way  of  Toledo,  into  the  northeastern  part  of 
Ohio,  which  will  increase  the  distance  and  cost  of  sheep,  but  generally  speaking  gives  a 
better  quality — that  is  to  say,  a  finer  wool  breed;  leaving  the  word  better  for  future 

discussion .  When  starting  for  a  drove  from  here,  I  would  have  a  good  light 

two  horse  wagon,  a  feed  trough  attached  behind ;  a  good  tent,  made  of  30  yards  cotton 
drilling;  2  buffalo  skins,  3  blankets,  1  horse  bucket,  1  do.  for  drinking  water,  1  tea 
kettle,  (as  men  will  drink  coffee,  and  so  will  I  when  on  the  road  where  I  am  obliged  to 
make  the  water  bitter  to  destroy  a  worse  taste),  1  coffee  pot,  a  pound  of  ground  coffee 

40  Prairie  Farmer,  IV  (1844),  p.  205. 

41  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1853,  Agriculture,  47. 

42  Prairie  Farmer,  III  (1843),  P-  3- 

43  Sears,  Pictorial  Description  of  the  United  States  (1848),  p.  546. 

44  Prairie  Farmer,  IV  (1844),  P-  205. 

43  Loc.  cit. 


SHEEP 


415 


in  a  little  bag,  a  frying  pan,  a  small  pot,  6  round  tin  plates,  3  cups,  3  knives  and  forks,  a 
little  pail  for  butter,  a  wooden  box  for  sugar,  a  few  other  small  fixings  in  the  provision 
chest,  40  pounds  of  bacon,  a  week’s  supply  of  bread,  a  bag  of  potatoes,  two  or  three 
bags  of  oats,  a  trunk  of  necessary  clothes  (old  ones),  an  axe,  an  auger,  a  little  spare 
rope  and  a  few  leather  strings— and  I  am  ready  for  a  start.  Rain  or  shine  I  would 
sleep  dry  and  warm  in  my  tent,  which  is  made,  when  set  up,  in  the  shape  of  the  roof 
of  a  house,  the  ridge  supported  on  a  pole  placed  upon  two  posts  about  seven  feet  long, 
sharpened  and  stuck  into  the  ground ;  the  bottom  is  fastened  with  pins,  one  gable  end 
closed  and  the  other  open  towards  the  fire — cooking  my  own  supper  and  eating  it  from  a 
broad  board  held  up  on  four  sticks  stuck  in  the  ground,  and  partaking  of  all  the  comforts 
ana  com  emences  that  an  old  camper  ’  always  knows  how  to  provide. 

I  would  take  with  me  a  man  and  a  boy,  and  a  saddle  and  bridle,  but  no  saddle 
horse,  because  I  can  purchase  one  there  for  $25  or  $30  that  would  bring  $40  at  home, 
in  driving  sheep,  a  good  dog  or  horse  is  very  necessary;  the  average  distance  should 
not  be  over  ten  miles  a  day,  if  yarded  at  night;  or  thirteen  miles  if  pastured  at  night. 
The  expense  of  the  baggage  wagon  and  horses  and  driver  is  much  less  than  it  would 
be  without  them,  besides  the  great  convenience  of  having  a  wagon  along,  which  enables 
one  to  camp  wherever  wood,  water  and  feed  can  be  had  at  night,  without  being  obliged 
to  push  ahead  ’  to  a  tavern. 

“  Two  good  drivers  can  drive  from  500  to  800,  though  three  are  much  better,  and 
sometimes  actually  necessary. 

“  I  find  on  looking  over  my  memorandum,  that  I  was  nine  days  traveling  last  summer, 
before  I  commenced  buying,  with  three  hands  and  three  horses— cash  out  $5.61,  in- 
cluding  horse-shoeing  and  wagon-repairing — all  the  horse  feed  purchased,  and  nearly 
all  the  provision  taken  from  home.  I  spent  about  a  week  in  buying,  and  hired  an  extra 
hand  at  a  dollar  a  day,  which  with  the  cost  of  collecting  and  keeping  sheep,  etc.,  is  all 
included,  as  before  stated,  in  the  average  expense  per  head.  I  was  3  weeks  on  the 
road  home— 800  sheep,  4  horses,  3  hands,  and  about  half  the  time  four  hands  to  board 
and  the  expense  of  everything  was  $35.04,  averaging  $1.66!  a  day,  and  grain  enormously 
dear  on  account  of  the  scarcity  occasioned  by  the  great  drought.  The  actual  cost  of 

driving  800  averaged  per  head  4!  cents,  and  adding  in  time  of  men  and  horses,  not 
over  9  cents  a  head.” 


EASTERN  SHEEP  FARMERS  MOVE  WESTWARD. 

Bauer  &  Eno  of  Sagamon  County,  Illinois,  in  1844,  assisted  by  a  Mr. 
Flower,  brought  about  3.500  ewes  and  80  bucks  into  the  State,  selected  from 
various  flocks  in  western  Pennsylvania  and  Ohio.  The  flocks  were  headed  by 
a  “  Merino  buck  from  Vermont.” 

Because  of  the  high  costs  involved,  relatively  few  ewes  were  driven  from 
Vermont,  unless  for  the  purpose  of  establishing  a  breeding-flock.  Most  west¬ 
ern  wool-growers,  however,  preferred  a  “  Vermont  Merino  ram  ”  to  head  the 
flock.  In  Lee  County,  Iowa,  in  1854*  good  “  Vermont  Merino  rams  ”  were 
valued  at  from  $50  to  $200  each. 

Many  eastern  wool-growers  moved  to  the  West,  bringing  their  flocks  with 
them.  The  Prairie  Farmer  noted  this  movement  in  1843 : 46 

“  Eastern  farmers  seem  to  be  already  aware  of  the  advantage  enjoyed  over  them  by 
prairie  farmers  in  wool-growing,  and  many  are  turning  their  attention  to  other  articles. 
Others,  who  have  informed  themselves,  are  removing  here,  where  they  know  they  can 
successfully  compete  with  farmers  from  any  section.  Last  fall  we  were  called  upon  by 
James  Harris,  Esq.,  of  Penn  Yan,  N.  Y.,  who  said  he  was  engaged  in  wool-growing, 
and  that  he  had  come  out  to  look  for  himself  and  see  if  the  truth  had  been  told  with 
regard  to  competition  from  the  West.  He  found  it  was  indeed  so,  and  that  he  must 
change  his  business  or  remove  West.  He  returned  East  to  form  his  determinations, 


40  Prairie  Farmer,  III  (1843),  p.  207. 


416 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


and  in  the  spring  we  saw  him  here  again,  and  he  said  he  should  the  coming  fall  drive 
out  2,000  Merino  ewes . ” 

Messrs.  Harvey  of  Illinois  wrote  in  1844: 47 

“  But  a  few  years  since  we  emigrated  from  Vermont  into  this  state.  We  soon  became 
satisfied  that  wool  could  be  grown  much  cheaper  here  than  in  our  own  native  state. 
In  1843,  we  purchased  in  Columbiana  County,  Ohio,  2,300,  and  drove  them  through 
by  land  into  this  region.” 

In  1844,  “the  great  sheep  year,”  it  was  said  that  the  rush  of  sheep  from 
the  East  into  Illinois,  Wisconsin,  and  Missouri  was  “  a  perfect  tornado.”  48 
Many  of  the  ventures  in  wool-growing,  however,  resulted  in  loss.  On  the 
long  drives  from  the  East  many  sheep  died.  Newly  arrived  immigrants,  of 
limited  means  and  unacquainted  with  the  prairies  or  the  care  of  sheep,  failed 
to  provide  winter  feed,  or  shelter  from  the  winds  and  storm,  the  prairie  mud, 
or  the  wolves. 

Moreover,  1843  marked  the  beginning  of  the  return  of  better  prices  for  the 
staple  products  in  the  West.  Wheat  had  just  begun  to  find  sale  at  prices 
which  would  a  little  more  than  pay  the  cost  of  production.  The  rate  of 
increase  in  sheep  was  therefore  much  less  during  the  next  few  years,  until 
the  general  failure  of  the  winter-wheat  crop  in  northern  Illinois,  Wisconsin, 
and  Iowa  led  many  farmers  to  turn  their  attention  again  to  general  farming, 
in  which  sheep-raising  occupied  a  prominent  place.49  Wool-growing  in  the 
prairie  region  of  the  West  in  1849  was  not  carried  on  to  the  exclusion  of 
other  branches  of  farming,  nor  could  any  large  territory  west  of  Ohio  and 
Michigan  be  called  a  distinctly  sheep-raising  region.  Many  large  flocks  had 
been  established,50  but  the  increase  was  only  in  proportion  to  that  of  other 
lines  of  production.  In  Peoria  County,  in  the  sheep  region  of  central  Illinois, 
there  were  reported  in  1849  to  t>e  5  A°cks  of  from  1,000  to  2,000  sheep,  2  flocks 
of  from  500  to  1,000,  and  3  flocks  of  from  300  to  500.51 

SHELTER  AND  FEEDING  OF  SHEEP  IN  THE  EAST  AND 

IN  THE  WEST. 

Among  the  best  farmers  of  New  York  and  New  England  in  1849,  sheep 
were  sheltered  during  the  winter  months  in  cheap  but  well-constructed  build¬ 
ings.52  Hay,  straw,  and  corn  stover,  with  occasionally  oats,  potatoes,  or  other 
roots,53  was  the  usual  ration  during  the  winter  feeding  season,  which  lasted 
for  fully  5  months.  In  the  wheat-growing  regions  of  New  York,  Michigan, 
and  eastern  Ohio,  sheep  were  regarded  as  especially  useful  to  reduce  the 
straw  stack  to  manure  in  the  winter  and  to  graze  over  the  stubble-land  in  the 
fall.  In  addition  to  the  profits  from  the  sale  of  wool,  the  sheep  was  said  to 
cheapen  very  much  the  raising  of  wheat.  They  ran  upon  the  fallow  land  in 
the  summer  and  to  the  straw-stack  through  the  winter  almost  until  spring, 
when  a  little  hay  and  a  little  grain  were  fed  to  them.54  A  cheap  method  of 

47  Cultivator,  new  series,  III  (1846),  p.  21. 

48  Prairie  Farmer ,  IV  (1844),  p.  204.  ^  . 

49  Wis.  State  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions  (1851),  p.  228;  Prairie  Farmer,  XII  (1852), 

p.  1 14. 

50  Prairie  Farmer,  IX  (1849),  p.  296. 
si  Ibid. 

52  N.  Y.  State  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions,  I  (1849),  pp.  58,  700. 

53  Ibid.,  (1842),  p.  140;  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1845,  p.  341. 

54  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1854,  Agriculture,  52. 


SHEEP 


417 


wintering  sheep  was  to  put  them  on  good  winter  pasture,  “  feeding  only  in 
severe  weather  in  time  of  snow,”  and  then  only  corn  stover  or  other  rough 
fodder.55  Among  many  of  the  “  old  wealthy  farmers  ”  of  Jefferson,  Harrison, 
Belmont,  and  other  eastern  counties  of  Ohio,  who  had  realized  large  fortunes 
from  their  extensive  flocks  of  fine-wooled  sheep,  it  was  said  to  be  well  under¬ 
stood  that  “  the  more  sheep,  the  more  clover  the  land  can  be  made  to  produce, 
and  the  larger  the  yield  of  clover  the  greater  will  be  the  quantity  of  wheat 
the  soil  is  capable  of  producing.” 

MANAGEMENT  OF  SHEEP  ON  THE  PRAIRIES. 

In  the  prairie  region  sheep  were  commonly  allowed  to  graze  during  the 
spring  and  fall,  and  frequently  during  the  entire  year,  with  no  other  care  or 


STATE  NO. 

Ohio  3.546.757 
NY  2.6/7,855 
Pa.  1,631540 
Mich.  1.27/743 
Ca/ifi  1,088,002 
te.  1,043,265 


STATE  NO. 
!nd.  551/75 
Ky.  933,590 
Mo.  937.445 
N.Mex.  8 30./ 76 
Other  7,574,373 

US.  22,47/275 


Fig.  ioo. — Sheep  and  Lambs,  i860.  Each  dot  represents  10,000  head. 

During  the  fifties  the  decline  in  the  eastern  states  continued.  Sheep  had 
begun  to  decrease  in  Ohio  by  i860.  The  wool  growing  region  was 
moving  farther  west  into  Michigan,  Texas,  and  New  Mexico.  In  Cali¬ 
fornia  there  was  an  increase  of  over  6,000,000  sheep  during  the  decade 
1850-1860. 


protection  than  that  afforded  by  the  strawstack  or  a  rail  fence.  Many  of  the 
best  sheep  raisers  took  their  sheep  to  the  open  prairie  in  April,  where  they 
were  allowed  to  run,  rent  free,  under  the  care  of  a  shepherd  who  supplied 
them  with  salt.  In  the  fall  they  were  turned  on  tame-grass  pastures,  and  in 
the  winter  brought  to  an  inclosure  where  they  were  supplied  with  hay  and 
a  little  oats  and  corn.56 

A  much-debated  question  among  wool -growers  was  the  washing  of  the 
fleece  on  the  back  of  the  sheep.  The  practice  had  the  support  of  ancient  usage, 
but  was  open  to  serious  objection,  as  the  sheep  were  liable  to  serious  injury, 
and  sometimes  death  resulted  from  exposure.57  The  practice  was  rapidly 
declining. 

65  Ibid.,  1852,  p.  263. 

6(5  Country  Gentleman,  XIV  (1859),  P-  347- 

67  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1847,  p.  212;  1854,  Agriculture,  37. 

28 


418 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


The  census  of  i860  showed  that  for  the  country  as  a  whole,  sheep  had 
increased  hardly  at  all  during  the  previous  decade.  In  the  Eastern  States  the 
decrease  of  1840  to  1850  had  continued,  but  at  a  slackened  rate.  Ohio,  New 
York,  Pennsylvania,  Michigan,  in  the  order  named,  were  the  leading  States. 
Ohio,  Indiana,  and  Illinois,  which  had  been  the  center  of  sheep-raising  from 
1840  to  1850,  showed  a  decrease  during  the  next  decade.  The  center  of 
sheep-raising  had  moved  west,  and  in  i860  California,  Texas,  and  New  Mex¬ 
ico  showed  the  largest  increase.  In  California  there  were  in  1850  less  than 
20,000  sheep  and  in  i860  over  1,000,000;  in  Texas  the  increase  was  from 
100,000  to  750,000,  and  in  New  Mexico  from  377,000  to  830,000  (see  figs. 
99,  100).  The  sheep  drives  of  the  previous  decade  were  repeated;  not  now 
from  the  East  to  Illinois,  but  from  Illinois  to  Texas.58 

In  New  England,  the  three  southern  States,  Massachusetts,  Connecticut, 
and  Rhode  Island,  had  shown  the  largest  decrease  in  the  number  of  sheep 
since  1840.  In  the  three  northern  States,  Vermont,  New  Hampshire,  and 
Maine,  there  was  still  much  cheap  mountain  land  adapted  to  grazing,  but 
which  because  of  the  lack  of  buildings  or  means  of  transportation  was  not  suit¬ 
able  for  dairying.  The  relatively  heavy  fleeces  yielded  by  many  Vermont  flocks, 
together  with  the  high  prices  received  from  western  and  southern  breeders  for 
purebred  Vermont  Merino  stock,  enabled  many  Vermont  breeders  still  to  main¬ 
tain  their  flocks  at  a  proft.  The  census  of  i860  reports  the  average  weight  of 
fleece  in  Vermont  at  4.1  pounds;  for  the  United  States  as  2.7  pounds.  In 
Maine,  the  only  New  England  State  showing  an  increase  in  sheep  from  1850 
to  i860,  they  were  regarded  as  of  great  assistance  in  clearing  brush-land  pas¬ 
ture.  In  New  York,  in  the  dairying  districts  of  the  eastern  and  central  part  of 
the  State,  wool-growing  had  greatly  declined.  In  i860  it  was  centered  in  the 
wheat-growing  districts  of  the  Genesee  region.  In  Ohio,  after  about  1854*  the 
number  of  sheep  began  to  decline. 


Table  53. — Decline  of  sheep  in  Ohio,  1850  to  i860 P 


1850  .  3,812,707 

1851  . 3,619,674 

1852  .  3,059,796 

1853  .  4,104,450 

1854  .  4,845,  ^9 


1855  .  4,337,943 

1856  .  3,5i3,68o 

1857  .  3,276,539 

1858  .  3,377,840 

1859  .  3,366,073 


a  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1862,  Agriculture,  262. 


Fine-wool  sheep  rapidly  diminished  in  number,  and  long-wooled  mutton 
sheep  began  to  attract  more  attention.  The  Western  Reserve  region  was  con¬ 
stantly  increasing  its  dairy  production,  with  a  corresponding  decrease  in  wool 
production.  In  the  southern  part  of  the  State  a  “  shorthorn  mania  ”  was  said 
to  have  hindered  somewhat  the  improvement  of  sheep.59 
A  Miami  County,  Ohio,  farmer  wrote  in  1858: 60 

“  I  have  no  doubt  fine  wooled  sheep  are  decreasing  yearly  in  this  county,  and  I  be¬ 
lieve  in  the  Miami  valley  generally,  at  least  for  the  last  few  years.  The  cause,  I  think, 
is  obvious;  lands  are  becoming  too  high  priced  to  afford  a  profit  from  wool  growing. 

58  Country  Gentleman,  XV  (i860),  p.  284. 

59  Loc.  cit. 

00  Ohio  State  Bd.  Agric.,  14th  Annual  Report  (1859),  P-  582. 


SHEEP 


419 


A  farm,  costing  $50  or  over  per  acre,  cannot  be  made  to  pay  a  living  profit  by  turning  it 
into  a  sheep  farm,  where  the  sheep  are  valuable  mainly  on  account  of  their  wool. 
Besides,  fine  wooled  sheep  require  more  care  and  nursing  than  most  of  our  farmers  are 
willing  to  give  them,  without  which  they  will  soon  run  down  and  become  worth¬ 
less .  I  know  many  farmers  who  are  starting  flocks  of  mutton  sheep,  but  none 

who  are  going  into  the  business  of  raising  fine  wool.” 

With  the  coming  of  the  railroads,  sheep  were  fattened  in  Ohio  for  the 
eastern  markets,  and  in  addition  there  was  a  demand  for  sheep  from  the  West 
and  South.  Many  sheep  were  driven  from  Ohio  to  Texas.  In  Michigan  the 
number  of  sheep  continued  rapidly  to  increase,  as  during  the  previous  decade. 

SHEEP  DRIVING  FROM  ILLINOIS  TO  TEXAS  IN  1860. 

D.  A.  A.  Nichols  gives  a  good  description  of  a  sheep  drive  from  Illinois  to 
Texas  in  i860 : 61 

“  The  distance  from  the  Mississippi  River  at  Hannibal,  Mo.,  to  the  Missouri  River 
at  Boonville  is,  in  round  numbers,  100  miles.  From  Boonville  to  Carthage,  Mo.,  is 
some  more  than  200  miles.  From  Carthage  to  the  crossing  of  the  Arkansas  River  in  the 
Indian  Territory  is  160  miles.  From  the  Arkansas  to  the  Red  River  is  called  by  some 
180  miles,  by  others  200  miles.  There  are  three  toll  bridges  on  the  route,  and  the  toll 
was  usually  five  dollars  for  2,000  sheep  or  more.  The  streams  they  ferried  were 
the  Mississippi,  Missouri,  Grand,  Osage,  and  Arkansas.  Ferriage  usually  costs  one-half 
cent  per  head.  They  swam  their  flocks  across  the  Canadian  and  Red  Rivers,  and  all 
the  minor  streams  along  the  route.  Water  is  plenty  along  the  road;  but  sometimes 
good  drinking  water  cannot  be  found  without  going  a  little  off  the  main  Texas 
road . 

“  Sheep  have  to  be  penned  every  night  when  on  the  road,  to  keep  them  together 
and  preserve  them  from  wolves.  Those  who  are  intending  to  start  drives  this  summer, 
would  have  to  get  their  pens  in  Illinois  or  Missouri,  as  rope  or  cloth  cannot  be  procured 
reasonably  in  the  ‘  Nation.’  Good  yardwide  sheeting  makes  a  good  pen.  Stakes  must  be 
sewed  in  at  the  corners,  and  in  the  middle  of  each  side  of  the  pen,  to  stretch  or  tighten 
the  cloth  making  the  pen  octagonal.  A  pen  made  of  rope  and  stakes  is  not  blown  down 
by  winds  as  easily  as  cloth  pens,  but  the  cloth  pens  do  not  get  tangled  when  rolled  up. 
like  ropes.  Drovers  have  to  cook  their  own  food  on  the  road.  Groceries  must  be 
procured  before  starting.  Flour  and  bacon  can  be  obtained  along  the  route.  A  good 
covered  wagon  and  team,  a  portable  stove,  an  extra  horse  or  mule  to  ride,  good  guns 
and  ammunition,  to  supply  the  larder  with  game,  a  small  but  good  tent,  are  among  the 
necessaries  in  making  up  the  outfit. 

“  The  cost  per  head  of  the  sheep  is  about  ten  cents  from  Illinois  to  Texas.  This  is  for 
ferriage,  bridges,  etc.,  and  is  in  addition  to  the  cost  of  the  driver’s  provisions  and  outfit. 

“  R  is  better  to  drive  half  way  only,  the  first  season,  as  the  sheep  get  partially 
acclimated,  and  it  is  too  hard  a  drive  to  take  sheep  from  Illinois  to  Texas  in  one  year. 
Mr.  Dickson  and  my  brother  wintered  in  Jasper  County,  Missouri,  and  were  satisfied 
that  they  were  wise,  although  it  cost  something  for  feed.  Mr.  D.  says  that  he  knows  one 
man  who  drove  through  in  one  year,  who  had  1,000  sheep,  for  which  he  paid  $4  per 
head  in  Illinois,  and  he  lost  300  old  sheep  and  all  his  lambs ;  another  flock  of  700  now 
counts  but  150,  in  consequence  of  the  hard  drive.  Corn  can  usually  be  bought  in  the 
shock,  in  Missouri  for  25  to  30  cents,  and  the  prairie  grass  and  corn  fodder  with  the 
corn  will  keep  sheep  in  good  order.  In  the  summer  the  dust  is  somewhat  troublesome, 
but  after  the  middle  of  August,  the  roads  are  good  and  usually  free  from  dust.  Sheep 
which  cost  $4  per  head  in  Illinois  are  worth  in  Texas  from  $8  to  $10  per  head,  and 
the  wool  sheared  in  Missouri  will  more  than  pay  all  cost  of  wintering  and  labor.  The 
cost  of  wintering  in  Texas  is  simply  the  labor  of  penning. 

“  I  omitted  to  mention,  among  the  necessary  items  of  the  outfit,  a  water  keg.  There 
are  times  when  it  is  impossible  to  camp  on  a  *  branch  ’  or  stream,  and  a  keg  of  water  is 


61  Country  Gentleman,  XV  (i860),  p.  284. 


420 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


then  needed.  A  good  shepherd’s  dog  is  of  use,  although  not  absolutely  requisite.  A 
well  trained  dog  will  take  the  place  of  one  man,  in  driving  and  watching.” 

Sheep-driving  from  New  Mexico  to  Mexico  had  been  a  common  practice 
since  1800.  After  1849  the  gold  excitement  in  California  attracted  flocks  to 
that  State.  Between  1850  and  i860,  600,000  sheep,  it  was  estimated,  were 
driven  from  New  Mexico  to  California.  In  1856-57  sheep  sometimes  brought 
as  high  as  $16  per  head,  but  when  the  drives  were  larger  from  $3  to  $4  per 
head  was  a  more  common  price.62 

WHEAT  DISPLACES  SHEEP  ON  THE  PRAIRIES,  1850  TO  1860. 

Of  the  prairie  States  of  the  Northwest,  Indiana  and  Illinois  showed  a  de¬ 
cline  in  sheep  raising,  while  Wisconsin,  Iowa  and  Missouri  showed  but  a 
relatively  small  increase.  A  reason  for  the  decline  and  neglect  of  sheep  in 
the  prairie  region  lay  in  the  rapid  extension  of  wheat-growing.  Improved 
methods  of  harvesting,  high  prices,  and  good  yields  of  wheat  during  the  middle 
years  of  the  decade  1850  to  i860,  turned  attention  to  that  crop.  The  prairie 
farmer  as  yet  sowed  little  clover,  and  regarded  as  of  little  value  the  fertility 
to  be  gained  by  grazing  his  wheat  fields  with  sheep — practices  which  were 
highly  regarded  by  the  Ohio  wool  and  wheat  grower.  The  rush  of  sheep  into 
the  prairies  during  the  forties  had  resulted  in  many  failures.  Newly-arrived 
immigrants,  frequently  without  any  previous  experience  in  handling  sheep, 
established  large  flocks,  but  failed  to  provide  shelter  or  winter  feed.  The  open 
prairie  furnished  no  protection  from  the  cold  winter  winds  or  the  spring  rains. 
The  prairie  grasses  furnished  abundant  food  during  the  summer  months,  but 
were  killed  by  the  first  frost  of  autumn,  and  few  had  as  yet  provided  them¬ 
selves  with  the  tame  grasses.63 


IN  IOWA. 

In  Iowa,  a  writer  thus  explains  the  decline  of  wool  growing : 64 

“The  pioneer  removed  from  Pennsylvania  or  Ohio;  he  brought  his  flocks  with  him; 
he  left  behind  him  tame  grasses,  small  pasture  fields  highly  cultivated,  ‘  bbabling  brooks’; 
the  cool  shade  of  the  woods,  the  sheep  cote,  built  regardless  of  expense,  and  with  wise 
reference  to  the  health  and  comfort  of  his  sheep.  He  reaches  Iowa  and  finds  acres  of 
tall  waving  grass;  no  shade  from  sun  or  protection  from  cold.  Of  course  his  sheep 
deteriorate ;  naturally  his  flock  would  decrease ;  for  there  was  no  care  bestowed  upon  it, 
such  as  had  been  practiced  in  the  old  home.  Forgetting  all  the  influences  he  had  left, 
and  not  appreciating  the  deprivations  to  which  his  flock  was  being  subjected,  he  rashly 
concluded  that  Iowa  was  no  place  for  the  wool-grower.  Finding,  also,  a  munificent 
return  for  his  labor  in  grain-growing,  converted  into  hogs  and  cattle,  he  remained 
satisfied  with  his  full  crib  and  broad  acres,  and  abandoned  his  dwindling  flock.” 

By  i860  it  was  commonly  said  in  the  prairie  region  that  “  an  easy  way 
to  sink  a  fortune  is  to  go  into  the  sheep  speculation.” 

02  U.  S.  Census  of  1880 ,  vol.  Ill,  Agriculture,  Supplement,  Meat  Production,  35. 
c3  Iowa  State  Agric.  Soc.  4th  Annual  Report  (1857),  p.  388. 

04  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1864,  Agriculture,  175. 


Chapter  XXXV. — Dairying. 

The  dairy  regions  of  the  United  States  during  the  forties  lay  east  of  the 
Allegheny  Mountains.  The  census  of  1840  reported  the  total  value  of  dairy 
products  as  $33>7^7j000>  of  which  nearly  three-fourths  was  produced  in  the 
Eastern  States,  comprising  New  England,  New  York,  Pennsylvania,  and 
New  Jersey.  Over  $10,000,000  worth,  or  nearly  one-third  of  the  total,  was 
produced  in  New  York  alone.  The  dairy  product  of  Ohio  was  valued  at  less 
than  $2,000,000.  Farther  west  few  regions  produced  sufficient  dairy  products 
to  supply  their  home  demand,  and  many  had  to  bring  in  butter  and  cheese 
from  other  sections.1  During  the  forties  dairying  increased  rapidly  in  the 
Eastern  States  and  in  the  Western  Reserve  in  Ohio. 

GROWING  IMPORTANCE  OF  DAIRY  INDUSTRY  IN  NEW 

ENGLAND. 

In  New  England,  the  growing  importance  of  the  dairy  industry  had  long 
been  apparent.  Between  1830  and  1840  its  advance  had  been  checked  some¬ 
what  by  expansion  of  sheep-raising  in  the  regions  more  distant  from  market, 
particularly  in  New  Hampshire,  Vermont,  and  in  the  Berkshires  (western 
Massachusetts  and  western  Connecticut)  ;  but  by  1840  the  farmers  of  these 
districts  were  disposing  of  their  flocks  and  were  giving  more  attention  to 
dairying.2  By  1850  it  was  said  that  sheep  were  being  neglected  in  Vermont, 
and  that  all  other  branches  of  business  were  giving  way  in  northern  Ohio 
to  cheese-making.3  From  Windsor  County,  Vermont,  the  State  which  led 
New  England  in  the  production  of  both  butter  and  cheese,  a  writer  stated:  4 
“  The  productions  of  the  dairy  are  increasing  in  the  same  ratio  that  that  of 
wool  is  decreasing,  in  consequence  of  the  low  prices  of  the  latter,  and  the 
enhanced  value  of  the  former,  .  ...”  In  Berkshire  County,  Massachu¬ 
setts,  the  increased  attention  to  dairying  was  said  to  be  due  to  the  low  price 
of  wool  and  the  increased  facility  for  placing  the  butter  and  cheese  upon  the 
Boston  and  New  York  markets,  whence  much  of  the  cheese  was  sent  to  the 
Southern  States.5  From  Somerset  County,  Maine,  in  1851  it  was  reported: 6 

“  But  little  attention  has  yet  been  paid  to  dairies.  Our  distance  from  a  suitable  market 
for  the  produce  of  the  dairy,  and  the  difficulty  of  disposing  of  our  calves,  have  compelled 
us  to  raise  more  cattle  than  were  profitable;  ....  but  an  increased  attention  is  being 
given  to  the  dairy.  Many  farmers  have  reduced  their  sheep  flock,  and  increased  their 
stock  of  cows.” 


1  U.  S.  Census  of  1840  ( Agriculture  and  Industries) ,  409. 

2  Agriculture  of  Massachusetts,  2d  Report  (1838),  p.  45. 

3  Prairie  Farmer,  IX  (1849),  p.  260. 

4U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1848,  p.  368;  1849,  Agriculture,  p.  88. 

"Ibid.  1848,  p.  356;  Agriculture  of  Massachusetts,  2d  Report  (1838),  p.  45. 

8  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1851,  Agriculture,  136. 


421 


422  AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 

Litchfield  County,  in  western  Connecticut,  which  produced  one-half  of  the 
Connecticut  cheese,  had  long  been  celebrated  for  the  quantity  and  fine  quality 
of  its  product.  Farmers  in  eastern  Connecticut  and  Rhode  Island  were  not 
so  extensively  engaged  in  the  dairy  business.  There,  butter  and  milk  for  the 
supply  of  the  villages  and  seaports  were  the  principal  dairy  products.  Many 
farmers  made  their  own  supply  of  cheese,  and  but  very  little  was  put  on  the 
market.7  It  seems  that  enlarging  markets  and  more  adequate  means  of  trans¬ 
portation  were  encouraging  the  development  of  the  dairy  industry  in  New 

England. 

DAIRYING  IN  THE  HUDSON  AND  MOHAWK  VALLEYS. 

In  New  York  State,  the  Mohawk  and  Hudson  valleys  were  the  centers  of 
the  dairy  industry.  Herkimer,  Oneida,  Orange,  and  Dutchess  Counties  were 
known  throughout  the  country  for  the  amount  and  quality  of.  their  dairy 
products.8  The  industry  is  said  to  have  had  its  beginning  in  Herkimer  County 
about  1810,  when  dairymen  from  Cheshire  County,  Connecticut,  settled  there, 
bringing  with  them  the  knowledge  of  the  art  of  cheese-making.9  In  1815  the 
largest  dairies  in  America  were  said  to  be  in  this  county,  where  herds  were 
reported  to  number  from  30  to  40  milking  cows.  By  1820  the  soils  of  the 
Mohawk  Valley  region  had  become  exhausted  from  continuous  cropping  to 
wheat,  thus  forcing  general  change  in  the  system  of  husbandry,  and  the  at¬ 
tention  of  farmers  was  turned  more  to  dairying.  The  increase  of  cheese  pro¬ 
duction  after  about  1830  is  shown  in  table  54. 

Table  54. — Cheese  arriving  at  Albany  over  the  Erie  Canal.10 

lbs. 


1834  .  6,340,000 

1837  .  15,560,000 

1840  .  18,820,000 

1843  .  24,334,000 


Erie  and  Chautauqua  Counties,  in  western  New  York,  were  also  rapidly 
extending  their  dairy  business. 

EXPANSION  IN  CENTRAL  NEW  YORK. 

By  1850,  the  dairy  region  of  the  Mohawk  Valley  had  expanded,  including, 
in  addition  to  Herkimer  and  Oneida  Counties,  Madison,  Chenango,  and 
Otsego.  Herkimer  County  alone  produced  in  1845  over  8,000,000  pounds  of 
cheese,  of  which  1,356,000  pounds  were  made  in  the  single  town  of  Fairfield.* 11 
To  the  North,  Jefferson  and  St.  Lawrence  Counties  were  developing  as 
prominent  dairy  centers.  The  canal  system  provided  an  easy,  cheap  transpor¬ 
tation  for  the  cheese  to  eastern  and  southern  markets,  and  good  prices  also 
stimulated  production.  A  comparison  of  the  figures  given  by  the  New  York 


7  Ibid.,  1849,  Agriculture,  98. 

8  N.  Y.  State  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions,  V  (1845),  p.  59. 

9  Country  Gentleman,  XVIII  (1861),  p.  301.  (See  above,  p.  228.) 

10  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1845,  p.  326. 

11  Ibid.,  p.  325- 


DAIRYING 


423 


The  extensive  manufacture  of  cheese  was  confined  to  relatively  few 
regions.  In  the  Berkshires  and  the  Green  Mountain  region  of  New 
England  and  in  Herkimer  County,  New  York,  cheese  making  was  an 
established  industry.  Jefferson  and  St.  Lawrence  counties  in  northern 
New  York  and  the  vicinity  of  Erie  County  in  western  New  York  and 
the  Western  Reserve  in  Ohio  were  rapidly  developing  centers. 


During  the  fifties  the  production  of  cheese  declined  in  New  England. 
It  remained  nearly  stationary  in  the  country  as  a  whole. 


424  AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 

Stcitc  census  for  1845  with,  those  of  the  Federal  census  of  1850  indicates  only 
a  slight  increase  in  butter,  but  a  relatively  large  increase  in  cheese  production 

in  the  5  years. 


Table  55. — Cheese  produced  in  New  York  in  thousands  of  pounds. 


New  York 

U.  S.  census, 

census,  1845. 

1850. 

Butter  . 

. 79-502 

79,766 

Cheese  . 

. 36,745 

49,741 

Oneida  County  in  1854  reported:12 

“  Dairies  in  this  vicinity  comprise  from  ten  to  fifty  cows  each.  The  average  product 
may  be  estimated  at  120  pounds  of  butter,  or  250  to  275  pounds  of  cheese  to  a  cow. 
The  business  has  been  uniformly  good  for  several  years,  and  nearly  all  our  farmers 
are  engaged  in  it  to  some  extent;  some  in  connection  with  other  branches  of  agriculture, 
and  others  to  the  exclusion  of  nearly  everything  else.  This  was  once  a  great  wool¬ 
growing  county,  but  as  our  flocks  of  sheep  have  diminished  the  number  of  cows  has 
increased  in  proportion.” 

METHODS  OF  MAKING  BUTTER  AND  CHEESE. 

The  making  of  butter  and  cheese,  and  frequently  the  milking  of  the  cows 
as  well,  was  the  duty  of  the  women  of  the  farm.  Milking  by  women  was, 
however,  becoming  less  customary.  Various  methods  of  making  butter  and 
cheese  were  practiced.  Some  worked  the  butter  by  hand,  others  with  a 
wooden  paddle;  some  added  saltpeter,  others  thought  this  practice  injured  the 
quality  of  the  butter.  Orange  County  butter  was  made  by  churning  the  whole 
milk.  In  Delaware  County,  Pennsylvania,  butter  was  made  from  the  cream 
and  was  worked  with  a  damp  cloth.  A  cool  spring-house  or  a  damp  cellar 
was  regarded  as  essential  to  all  dairies.  The  cause  of  the  superior  quality  of 
Orange  County  butter  and  Herkimer  County  cheese  was  a  popular  subject 
of  discussion.  Some  ascribed  it  to  the  superior  quality  of  the  pastures  and 
springs ;  others  thought  it  was  owing  to  the  method  of  churning,  the  quality 
of  the  salt,  or  the  neatness  of  the  butter  and  cheese-makers.13 

It  was  the  ambition  of  many  dairy  regions  to  produce  butter  and  cheese 
that  would  sell  upon  the  New  York  market  at  the  same  price  as  the  famous 
products  of  these  counties.  But  the  lack  of  skill  and  equipment  was  a  great 
handicap  especially  in  the  more  newly  settled  regions.  A  report  from  St. 
Lawrence  County,  New  York,  in  1848  reads: 14 

“  Our  farmers  find  that  the  dairy  business  is  the  best  in  which  they  can  engage . 

But  still  there  is  a  drawback.  In  several  parts  of  the  county,  emigrants  from  Ireland 
and  Scotland,  in  considerable  numbers,  who  were  unacquainted  with  the  business,  are 
engaged  in  making  butter  and  cheese.  They  produce  articles  of  an  inferior  kind.  Their 
productions  injure  the  price  of  that  which  is  good;  but  they  are  improving,  and,  no 
doubt,  will  continue  to  mend.” 


12  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1854,  Agriculture,  21. 
33  Ibid.,  1848,  p.  388. 

14  Ibid.,  417. 


DAIRYING 


425 


BUTTER-MAKING  IN  ORANGE  COUNTY  (N.  Y.),  1843. 

Butter-making  in  Orange  County  in  1843  was  thus  described :  15 

“  The  milk  is  strained  in  pans  or  oaken  tubs,  holding  two  pails  full.  Every  thing  is 
done  in  the  cellar.  The  milk  is  not  meddled  with  until  it  is  coagulated,  when  each 

Table  56. — Cheese:  Production  in  the  United  States. 


[Source:  U.  S.  Censuses  of  1850  and  i860.] 


Geographic  division 
and  State. 

1850. 

i860. 

Total 
(1000  lbs.) 

Per 

capita 

(lbs.) 

Per  cent 
of  U.  S. 
total. 

Total 
(1000  lbs.) 

Per 

capita 

(lbs.) 

Per  cent 
of  U.  S. 
total. 

United  States . 

105,536 

4.6 

100.0 

103,664 

3-3 

100.0 

Geographic  Division : 

New  England  . 

27,120 

99 

257 

21,621 

6.9 

20.9 

Middle  Atlantic  . 

52,612 

8.9 

49.9 

51,239 

6.9 

494 

East  North  Central . . 

24T34 

5-3 

22.9 

26,819 

39 

25-9 

West  North  Central. 

413 

•5 

.4 

1,419 

7 

1.4 

Mountain  . 

37 

•5 

•  •  •  • 

91 

•5 

.1 

Pacific  . 

37 

•4 

•  •  •  • 

1,461 

3-3 

1.4 

New  England : 

Maine  . 

2,434 

4.2 

2.3 

1,800 

2.9 

17 

New  Hampshire  .... 

3T97 

IO.I 

3-o 

2,232 

6.8 

2.2 

Vermont  . 

8,721 

27.8 

8-3 

8,215 

26.1 

7-9 

Massachusetts  . 

7,088 

7-1 

6.7 

5794 

4-3 

5-i 

Rhode  Island  . 

317 

2.1 

•3 

182 

1.0 

.2 

Connecticut  . 

5,363 

14-5 

5-i 

3,898 

8-5 

3-8 

Middle  Atlantic: 

New  York  . 

49,741 

16.1 

47.1 

48,548 

12.5 

46.8 

New  Jersey  . 

366 

•7 

•4 

182 

•3 

.2 

Pennsylvania  . 

2,505 

1. 1 

2.4 

2,509 

•9 

2.4 

East  North  Central : 

Ohio  . 

20,820 

10.5 

197 

2I,6l9 

9.2 

20.8 

Indiana  . 

625 

.6 

.6 

606 

•4 

.6 

Illinois  . 

1,278 

1-5 

1.2 

1,848 

1. 1 

1.8 

Michigan  . 

1,01 1 

2.5 

1.0 

1,642 

2.2 

1.6 

Wisconsin  . 

400 

1-3 

•4 

1,104 

1.4 

1. 1 

W'est  North  Central : 

Minnesota  . 

IQQ 

1  2 

2 

Iowa  . 

210 

1. 1 

.2 

919 

1.4 

•9 

Missouri  . 

203 

•3 

.2 

260 

.2 

•3 

Nebraska  . 

12 

A 

Kansas  . 

29 

•3 

Mountain : 

•  •  •  • 

New  Mexico  . 

6 

.1 

•  •  •  • 

37 

•4 

•  •  •  • 

Utah  . 

3i 

2.7 

.... 

54 

1.3 

.1 

Pacific : 

Washington  . 

12 

I  0 

Oregon  . 

37 

2.8 

105 

2.0 

.1 

California  . 

a 

•  •  • 

.... 

1,344 

3-5 

1.3 

a  Less  than  500  pounds. 


day’s,  or  each  half  day’s  milk  is  put  in  the  churn  with  nearly  an  equal  quantity  of  water, 
cold  in  summer,  and  warm  in  autumn  or  winter,  to  bring  it  to  the  proper  temperature, 
which  is  from  55  to  60  degrees.  The  churn  is  made  in  the  barrel  form,  of  oak,  hooped 
with  iron,  with  a  wooden  hoop  three  inches  wide  at  top,  in  which  the  cover  rests.  For 
six  to  ten  cows,  the  churn  should  hold  30  gallons,  and  in  that  proportion  for  a  large 


16  Cultivator,  X  (1843),  p.  22. 


426 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


number.  I  believe  they  rarely  exceed  two  barrels,  as  in  large  dairies  they  prefer  to 
churn  several  times  a  day,  to  the  use  of  larger  vessels.  Churning  is  never  done  by 
hand,  except  for  a  single  cow.  In  small  dairies,  the  churn  is  worked  by  a  dog  or  sheep, 
the  latter  being  preferred;  the  larger  have  water  or  horse-power.  The  dog  or  sheep, 


Table  57. — Butter:  Production  in  the  United  States. 
[Source:  U.  S.  Censuses  of  1850  and  i860.] 


Geographic  division  and 
State. 

1850. 

i860. 

Total 
(1000  lbs.) 

Per  cap¬ 
ita  (lbs.) 

Per  cent  of 
U.  S.  total. 

Total 
(1000  lbs.) 

Per  cap¬ 
ita  (lbs.) 

Per  cent  of 
U.  S.  total. 

United  States  . 

313,345 

13-5 

100.0 

459,681 

14.6 

100.0 

Geographic  Division : 

New  England  . 

43,924 

16.1 

14.0 

51,486 

16.4 

1 1.2 

Middle  Atlantic  . 

129,132 

21.9 

41.2 

172,465 

23.1 

37-5 

East  North  Central... 

70,557 

15-6 

22.5 

124,017 

17.9 

27.0 

West  North  Central.. 

10,007 

11.4 

3.2 

29,054 

13-4 

6-3 

Mountain  . 

83 

1. 1 

•  •  •  • 

337 

1.9 

.1 

Pacific  . 

212 

2.0 

.1 

4,248 

9.6 

•9 

New  England : 

Maine  . 

9,244 

15.9 

30 

11,688 

l8.6 

2-5 

New  Hampshire  . 

6,977 

21.9 

2.2 

6,957 

21.3 

i-5 

Vermont  . 

12,138 

38.6 

3-9 

15,900 

50.5 

3-5 

Massachusetts  . 

8,071 

8.1 

2-5 

8,298 

6.7 

1.8 

Rhode  Island . 

996 

6.7 

•3 

1,022 

5-9 

.2 

Connecticut  . 

6,498 

17.5 

2.1 

7,621 

l6.6 

i-7 

Middle  Atlantic: 

New  York  . 

79,766 

25.8 

25.5 

103,097 

26.6 

22.4 

New  Jersey  . 

9,487 

19.4 

3-0 

10,714 

15-9 

2.3 

Pennsylvania  . 

39,879 

17.2 

12.7 

58,654 

20.2 

12.8 

East  North  Central : 

Ohio  . 

34,449 

17.4 

II.O 

48,543 

20.7 

10.5 

Indiana  . 

12,881 

130 

4.1 

18,307 

13.6 

4.0 

Illinois  . 

12,527 

14.7 

4.0 

28,053 

16.4 

6.1 

Michigan  . 

7,066 

17.8 

2.2 

15,503 

20 .7 

3-4 

Wisconsin  . 

3,634 

11.9 

1.2 

13,611 

17-5 

3-0 

West  North  Central : 

Minnesota  . 

1 

.2 

•  •  •  • 

2,958 

1 7.2 

.6 

Iowa  . 

2,171 

1 1.3 

•7 

n,954 

1 7.7 

2.6 

Missouri  . 

7,835 

H-5 

2-5 

12,705 

10.7 

2.8 

Dakota  Territory  ...  . 

•  •  •  • 

2 

.4 

•  •  •  • 

Nebraska  . 

342 

I  I.Q 

.1 

Kansas  . 

1,093 

10.2 

.2 

Mountain : 

New  Mexico  . 

a 

•  •  • 

•  •  •  • 

13 

•  •  • 

•  •  •  • 

Utah  . 

83 

7-3 

•  •  •  • 

316 

7-8 

.1 

Nevada  . 

8 

1. 1 

Pacific : 

Washington  . 

•  •  • 

•  •  •  • 

153 

13.2 

•  •  •  • 

Oregon  . 

211 

15-9 

.1 

1,000 

I9.I 

.2 

California  . 

1 

. . . 

•  •  •  • 

3,095 

8.1 

•7 

a  Less  than  500  pounds. 


walks  on  a  wheel  8  feet  in  diameter,  inclined  at  an  angle  of  22  degrees,  cleats  being 


nailed  on  to  prevent  the  feet  of  the  sheep  from  slipping .  It  [the  butter]  is 

packed  down  solid  in  tubs  of  40  or  firkins  of  80  pounds .  When  one  churning 


has  been  packed,  a  cloth  is  put  on  covered  with  salt.  This  is  taken  off  at  each  addition, 
and  replaced,  until  the  tub  or  firkin  is  almost  full,  when  half  an  inch  of  strong  brine  is 
poured  over  the  cloth.” 


DAIRYING 


427 


The  United  States  Navy  used  Orange  County  butter  exclusively,  as  it  was 
claimed  that  no  butter  would  as  well  resist  the  action  of  tropical  climates.  An 
investigation  in  1848,  however,  disclosed  that  much  butter  sold  as  Orange 
County  butter  was  in  fact  made  in  a  number  of  surrounding  counties.  Dealers 
in  the  butter  from  other  counties  labeled  their  product  “  Orange  County  ”  to 
take  advantage  of  the  preference  of  the  markets.16  While  much  of  the  butter 
and  cheese  placed  upon  the  market  was  of  very  poor  quality,  the  spread  of 
knowledge  concerning  the  manner  of  care  and  making,  together  with  discrimi¬ 
nation  in  price  among  buyers,  was  leading  to  decided  improvement  in  quality.17 
After  1830,  dairy  methods  became  a  popular  theme  of  discussion  in  the  eastern 
agricultural  journals. 

DAIRYING  IN  SOUTHEASTERN  PENNSYLVANIA. 

In  southeastern  Pennsylvania — in  Bucks,  Montgomery,  Chester,  Delaware, 
and  surrounding  counties — much  attention  was  given  to  dairying,  and  espe¬ 
cially  to  the  production  of  butter  and  milk  for  the  Philadelphia,  Wilmington, 
and  Baltimore  markets.  Very  little  cheese  was  made  in  the  State,  except  in 
the  three  counties  adjoining  the  Western  Reserve  region  of  Ohio.  In  New 
Castle  County,  Delaware,  dairies  of  from  15  to  100  cows  were  said  to  be  com¬ 
mon  in  1 847. 18  In  northern  Maryland,  increased  attention  was  given  to  butter¬ 
making,  owing,  it  was  said,  to  the  influence  of  several  families  of  the  Society 
of  Friends  and  a  few  enterprising  northerners.  Much  of  the  butter  from  these 
regions  was  carried  to  market  in  pound  lumps  and  sold  from  wagons  and 
market-stalls.19  The  price  of  fresh  butter  on  the  Philadelphia  market  varied 
from  16  to  40  cents  during  the  year. 

FEEDING  METHODS  IN  THE  EAST. 

In  the  East,  the  dairy  herd  was  commonly  pastured  during  the  summer 
months,  and  in  the  winter  was  fed  on  corn-fodder  and  oat  straw,  with  hay 
once  a  day.  Sometimes  2  quarts  of  Indian  meal  or  wheat  bran  per  day  was 
added  for  the  last  two  months  of  feeding  in  the  barn.20  Especially  was  the 
latter  true  if  milk  was  being  sold  to  the  city  trade.  Much  of  the  butter  and 
cheese  was  made  during  the  spring,  fall,  and  summer  months.  In  the  vicinity 
of  eastern  cities,  where  there  was  an  increasing  demand  for  milk,  farmers 
experimented  with  soiling.  In  the  neighborhood  of  Rochester,  New  York, 
it  was  considered  good  management  to  keep  a  cow  the  year  round  on  an  acre 
of  ground.21  The  extension  of  transportation  facilities,  however,  together 
with  the  high  prices  of  labor,  prevented  soiling  from  becoming  general. 

CHEESE  PRODUCTION  IN  THE  WESTERN  RESERVE. 

The  Western  Reserve  of  Ohio,  which  was  settled  almost  exclusively  by 
New  Englanders,  was  popularly  known  as  “  Cheesedom.”  22  The  uncertainty 

16  Prairie  Farmer,  VIII  (1848),  p.  194. 

17  Western  Farmer,  I  (1840),  p.  135;  N.  Y.  State  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions,  II  (1842), 

P-  43- 

18  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1849,  Agriculture,  119. 

19  Ibid.,  1850,  Agriculture,  438. 

20  N.  Y.  State  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions,  V  (1845),  p.  59. 

21  Loc.  cit. 

22  Cultivator,  new  series,  VIII  (1851),  p.  325. 


428 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


of  the  grain  crops  in  this  region  and  its  adaptability  to  grazing  induced  many 
of  the  first  settlers  to  turn  their  attention  to  dairying.  The  success  attending 
their  efforts  led  others  to  follow  their  example,  and  before  1849  the  manu¬ 
facture  of  cheese  had  become  the  leading  industry.23  In  1836  the  entire  state 
of  Ohio  produced  but  little  over  1,000,000  pounds  of  cheese.  In  1848  the 
Western  Reserve  alone  exported  15,593,000  pounds,  chiefly  to  eastern  mar¬ 
kets,  but  also  to  Cincinnati  and  St.  Louis.24  During  the  forties,  wool-growing 
and  dairying  had  both  increased  in  this  region ;  but  by  1850  many  farmers 
who  formerly  had  kept  dairies  and  also  raised  stock,  grew  wool,  etc.,  were 
now  turning  “  their  attention  wholly  to  the  dairy  business.” 25  Of  the 
20,820,000  pounds  of  cheese  reported  for  Ohio  by  the  census  of  1850, 
17,648,000  pounds  were  in  7  of  the  northeastern  counties — Ashtabula,  Trum¬ 
bull,  Lake,  Geauga,  Portage,  Cuyahoga,  and  Summit.  Lake  Erie  and  the 
Ohio  and  Pennsylvania  canals  furnished  cheap  transportation  for  the  greater 
part  of  the  cheese.  With  the  development  of  California  after  1849,  large 
quantities  were  shipped  to  that  State. 

The  best  dairymen  of  the  Western  Reserve  erected  substantial  buildings 
in  which  to  shelter  and  feed  their  cows.  In  the  large  dairy  sections  herds  of 
30  to  60  cows  were  kept ;  in  the  districts  where  dairying  was  of  less  importance, 
the  herds  ranged  from  5  to  15  cows.26  Outside  of  the  Western  Reserve  region, 
dairying  in  Ohio  was  commonly  carried  on  in  connection  with  other  farm 
enterprises.  Butter  was  exported  by  many  Ohio  counties,  but  most  counties 
secured  a  large  part  of  their  supply  of  cheese  from  the  Western  Reserve.  By 
1850  Michigan  was  shipping  butter  to  the  East.27’ 

WHEAT  VS.  DAIRYING  WEST  OF  OHIO. 

West  of  Ohio,  the  greater  portion  of  farmers  made  more  or  less  butter  for 
use  in  the  home,  and  a  scattered  few  were  engaged  in  cheese-making.  Other 
pursuits,  however,  proved  more  attractive  to  the  western  farmer,  and  in  many 
sections,  as  for  example  in  the  wheat  region  of  southern  Wisconsin  and 
northern  Illinois,  butter  and  cheese  were  imported  from  Ohio.  Agricultural 
journals,  however,  contended  that  the  New  Orleans  butter  markets  should  be 
supplied  by  the  farmers  of  the  Mississippi  Valley  rather  than  by  those  of 
Orange  County,  New  York.  The  failure  of  winter  wheat  in  northern  Illinois  | 
and  in  southern  Wisconsin  for  a  number  of  years  after  1847  led  many  trans¬ 
planted  New  England  and  New  York  families  to  take  up  dairying.  It  was 
anticipated  in  Wisconsin  that  this  branch  of  agriculture  would  soon  rank 
among  the  leading  interests  of  the  State.  Much  butter  and  cheese,  however, 
was  still  imported.  For  example,  Crawford  County,  Wisconsin,  in  1851  re¬ 
ported  that  “  the  most  of  the  cheese  consumed  in  our  mines,  our  pineries,  and 
on  this  frontier,  is  made  on  the  Western  Reserve  in  Ohio.”  28  Dane  County 

23  Ohio  State  Bd.  of  Agric.  1st  Annual  Report  (1846),  p.  8;  2d  Annual  Report  (1847), 

P-  25. 

24  Ibid.,  3d  Annual  Report  (1848),  p.  9. 

25  Ibid.,  32;  4th  Annual  Report  (1849),  P-  51- 

26  Ohio  State  Bd.  of  Agric.  3d  Annual  Report  (1848),  p.  43;  2d  Report  (1847),  p.  25; 

Country  Gentleman,  XIV  (1859),  P*  255. 

27  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1850,  Agriculture,  330. 

28  Wis.  State  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions  (1851),  p.  148. 


DAIRYING  429 

reported  in  the  same  year: 29  “  Large  quantities  of  butter  and  cheese,  espe¬ 
cially  the  latter,  are  annually  imported  from  other  states.” 

BUTTER  AND  MARKET  MILK  DISPLACING  CHEESE, 

1850  TO  1860. 

During  the  decade  1850  to  i860  the  number  of  cattle  reported  as  dairy  cows 
increased  from  6,385,000  to  8,586,000.  (See  figs.  105,  106.)  Butter  produc¬ 
tion  increased  from  313,000,000  pounds  to  460,000,000  pounds  while  the 
cheese  production  showed  little  change.  The  centers  of  production  of  dairy 
products  in  i860  were  much  the  same  as  in  1850.  With  the  rapid  settlement 
of  the  West,  the  number  of  dairy  cows  was  increasing,  especially  in  northern 
Illinois,  eastern  Iowa  and  Minnesota,  southern  Wisconsin,  and  Missouri. 

The  growing  population  of  the  eastern  cities  demanded  an  increasing  amount 
of  fresh  market  milk.  The  extension  of  railroads  was  continually  providing 
new  means  of  transportation  and  opening  up  new  territories  from  which  the 
supply  might  be  drawn.  Regions  within  the  reach  of  the  large  cites  began  to 
abandon  cattle-fattening  and  the  making  of  butter  and  cheese  and  turned  their 
attention  more  directly  to  marketing  milk.  Orange  and  Dutchess  County 
farmers,  long  widely  famed  for  their  butter  dairies,  began  the  production  of 
market  milk  for  New  York  City.  In  the  State  of  Massachusetts  the  sales  of 
milk  for  the  year  1855  amounted  to  $760, ooo.30 

With  the  exception  of  Pennsylvania  and  Maryland,  every  northern  State 
east  of  Ohio  showed  a  decline  in  cheese  production,  while  every  northern  State, 
with  the  exception  of  New  Hampshire,  reported  an  increase  in  butter  produc¬ 
tion.  In  New  England,  where  the  movement  was  typical  of  the  eastern 
States,  the  figures  were : 


1850.  i860. 

Cheese  made  . 27,120,000  21,621,000 

Butter  made  .  43,924,000  51,486,000 


Lew  York,  which  during  the  period  1845  *849  had  had  a  large  increase 

in  cheese  production  and  a  very  little  increase  in  butter  production,  showed 
a  slight  decline  in  cheese  production  and  a  large  increase  in  butter  production 
during  the  period  1850  to  i860.  Cheese  exports,  which  increased  from  723,217 
pounds  in  1840  to  17,433,682  pounds  in  1849,  had  fallen  to  3,763,932  pounds 
by  1853.  Butter  exports,  on  the  other  hand,  nearly  maintained  the  level  of  the 
previous  decade. 

In  the  Western  Reserve,  cheese-making  continued  important.  West  of 
Ohio  there  was  a  small  increase  in  cheese-making,  but  a  considerable  increase 
in  butter  production.  Every  section,  with  the  exception  of  the  Pacific  Coast, 
showed  a  decline  in  per  capita  cheese  production. 

ATTEMPTS  TO  ESTABLISH  CHEESE  FACTORIES  IN  THE 

WESTERN  RESERVE. 

About  1850  attempts  were  made  to  establish  the  factory  system  of  cheese 
manufacture  on  the  Western  Reserve  of  Ohio.  In  1847  an  establishment  in 


29  Ibid.,  155. 

30  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1861,  Agriculture,  261. 


430 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


Trumbull  County  was  said  to  be  manufacturing  1,000  pounds  of  cheese  a  day.31 
In  1849  another  factory  was  reported  in  operation  in  Ashtabula  County. 
Others  were  soon  established  in  adjoining  counties.  The  early  factories  did  not 
have  the  milk  delivered  at  the  plant,  but  sent  out  teams  on  regular  routes, 
which  daily  collected  the  curd  from  the  farm  house  and  hauled  it  to  the  fac¬ 
tory.32  The  factories,  however,  were  apparently  unsuccessful;  in  1859  they 
were  all  reported  to  have  closed  down.33 

ORIGIN  OF  THE  ASSOCIATED  DAIRY  SYSTEM. 

The  associated  dairy  system,  known  as  the  “American  system,”  which 
developed  during  this  period,  met  with  better  success.  Several  factories  were 
in  operation  in  Oneida  County,  New  York,  in  that  year  and  were  said  to  be 
turning  out  cheese  of  superior  quality.  The  development  of  the  system  was 
described  by  Mr.  N.  A.  W illard,  of  Herkimer  County,  New  \ork. 

“The  system  had  been  first  inaugurated  by  Jessie  Williams,  a  farmer  living  near 
Rome  [in  Oneida  County],  and  was  suggested  from  mere  accidental  circumstances. 
Mr.  Williams  was  an  experienced  and  skillful  cheese  maker,  and  at  a  time  when  the 
bulk  of  American  cheese  was  poor,  his  dairy,  therefore,  enjoyed  a  high  reputation,  and 
was  eagerly  sought  for  by  dealers.  In  the  spring  of  1851,  one  of  his  sons,  having 
married,  entered  upon  farming  on  his  own  account,  and  the  father  contracted  the 
cheese  made  on  both  farms  at  seven  cents  a  pound,  a  figure  considerably  higher  than  was 
being  offered  for  other  dairies  in  that  vicinity.  When  the  contract  was  made  known  to  the 
son,  he  expressed  great  doubt  as  to  whether  he  should  be  able  to  manufacture  the 
character  of  cheese  that  would  be  acceptable  under  the  contract.  He  had  never  taken 
charge  of  the  manufacture  of  cheese  while  at  home,  and  never  having  given  the  sub¬ 
ject  that  close  attention  which  it  necessarily  requires,  he  felt  that  his  success  in  coming 
up  to  the  required  standard  would  be  a  mere  matter  of  chance.  His  father,  therefore, 
proposed  coming  daily  upon  the  farm  and  giving  the  cheese-making  a  portion  of  his 
immediate  supervision.  But  this  would  be  very  inconvenient,  and  while  devising  means 
to  meet  the  difficulties  and  secure  the  benefits  of  the  contract,  which  was  more  than 
ordinarily  good,  the  idea  was  suggested  that  the  son  should  deliver  the  milk  from  his 
herd  daily  at  the  father’s  milk-house.  From  this  thought  sprung  the  idea  of  uniting 
the  milk  from  several  neighboring  dairies  and  manufacturing  it  at  one  place.  Buildings 
are  speedily  erected  and  fitted  up  with  apparatus,  which,  proving  a  success,  thus  gave 
birth  to  the  associated  system  of  dairying.” 

Table  58  shows  the  number  of  cheese  factories  erected  in  New  York  from 
1850  to  i860: 


Table  58. — Cheese  factories  erected  in  New  York  State.'1 


a  u.  S.  Commissioner  of  Agriculture,  Annual  Report  1865,  p.  433- 


31  Ohio  State  Bd.  of  Agric.  2d  Annual  Report  (1847),  p.  92. 

32  Prairie  Farmer,  XII  (1852),  p.  30. 

33  Country  Gentleman,  XIV  (1859) »  P*  255- 

31  U.  S.  Commissioner  of  Agric.,  Annual  Report  1865,  p.  432. 


DAIRYING 


431 


PRODUCTION  RECORDS  OF  DAIRY  COWS. 

\V  ith  the  increased  attention  to  dairying  after  1830,  the  improvement  of 
dairy  cattle  or  the  development  of  a  dairy  breed  became  a  popular  subject 
of  discussion.  The  production  of  the  average  dairy  cow  during  the  period 
1840  to  1850  was  commonly  estimated  at  150  pounds  of  butter  or  from  300  to 
400  pounds  of  cheese  per  annum.35  Table  59  shows  the  performance  of 
several  of  the  most  extraordinary  cows  in  Massachusetts  previous  to  1845 : 


Table  59. 


Massachusetts,  Transactions  of  the  Agricultural  Societies  1849,  p.  9. 


Date. 

Name. 

Place. 

Weekly 
production 
of  butter. 

Length 
of  time. 

1824 

Nourse  cow  . 

Danvers  .... 

lbs. 

T  A 

Weeks. 

l6 

l6 

l6 

1826 

Oakes  cow  . 

.  ...Do. 

l4 

16 

T  A 

1828 

Sanderson  cow . 

Waltham  .... 

1830 

Hazeltine  cow  . 

Haverhill  . 

A4 

T  A 

1830 

Barrett  cow  . 

Northampton 

14 

15 

T  A 

12 

1830 

Homer’s  cow  . 

Bedford  .... 

12 

1845 

Buxton  cow  . 

Danvers  . 

l4 

16 

12 

12 

Fig.  103. — Butter,  1849.  Each  dot  represents  100,000  pounds. 

The  manufacture  of  butter  was  more  generally  distributed  than  that  of  cheese. 
Jrange  County,  New  York,  central  New  York,  and  Delaware  County,  Pennsylvania, 
vere  widely  known  for  the  quality  and  quantity  of  their  butter. 


15  U-  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1845,  P-  995- 


432 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


36  Country  Gentleman,  XVIII  (1861),  p.  255- 

37  N.  Y.  State  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions,  I  (1841),  pp.  255,  261. 

38  Cultivator,  VII  (1840),  p.  134;  Country  Gentleman,  III  (1854),  p.  233. 

39  2d  Report,  Agriculture  of  Massachusetts  (1838),  p.  54* 

40  N.  H.  State  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions  (1852),  p.  246. 

41  Ohio  State  Bd.  of  Agric.  4th  Annual  Report  (1849),  pp.  52,  79- 


Fig.  104— Butter,  1859.  Each  dot  represents  100,000  pounds. 

From  1850  to  i860  there  was  a  large  increase  in  butter  production.  West  of  Ohio 
there  was  no  important  center  of  butter  production. 

INTRODUCTION  OF  NEW  BREEDS  OF  DAIRYr  CATTLE. 

Formerly,  in  the  principal  dairy  regions  of  the  East,  dairymen  had  raised 
their  own  stock;  but  as  the  price  of  dairy  produce  advanced  the  practice 
became  prevalent  among  dairymen  of  filling  up  their  barns  from  herds  driven 
in  from  other  counties.36  The  Holstein,  Jersey,  Ayrshire,  and  other  dairy 
breeds  had  been  introduced  before  1840.37  A  group  of  Boston  men  estab¬ 
lished  a  model  farm  where  the  “  Cream  Pot  ”  cattle  were  developed.  The 
Massachusetts  Agricultural  Society  went  to  considerable  expense  to  promote 
the  Ayrshire  and  Devon  breeds  of  cattle  for  dairy  purposes  in  that  State 
It  was  not  until  about  1850,  however,  that  much  attention  was  paid  to  the 

development  of  a  distinctly  dairy  type  of  cattle.40 

By  i860  most  of  the  leading  dairy  breeds  of  the  present  time  had  been 
introduced  and  herds  of  cattle  with  some  improved  blood  were  well  distributed 
in  the  eastern  dairy  regions.  A  “  dash  ”  of  pure  blood  in  the  sire  was  desired 
by  many  of  the  best  dairymen.  In  the  Western  Reserve,  cows  were  said  to  be 
mostly  of  the  native  breed,  with  some  mixture  of  the  Shorthorn,  Devon,  and 
Bakewell  stock ;  but  as  a  rule  little  attention  had  thus  far  been  given  to  any 
particular  breed.  Improvement  generally  resulted  from  the  retaining  by 
dairymen  for  their  own  use  of  such  cows  as  proved  good  milkers  and  the 
disposal  of  the  others  to  drovers.41  _ _____ 


DAIRYING 


433 


Fig.  105.  Dairy  cows,  1850.  Each  dot  represents  2,000  head. 

northeast*  but  shnwV^S  throu£hou‘  ‘he  agricultural  region  of  th, 

nortneast,  but  showed  concentration  in  the  western  part  of  New  England  central  Nev 

York,  southeastern  Pennsylvania  and  northeastern  Ohio.  g  ’  central  Nev 


Fig.  106.— Dairy  cows,  i860.  Each  dot  represents  2,000  head. 

exrandngwlectfiftf  nithe.ndairy  Centers  of. the  eastern  states  continued  to  develop  and 
expand.  West  of  Ohio  there  was  yet  no  important  dairying  center. 


434 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


Table  6o. — Dairy  cows:  Number  in  the  United  States. 
[Source:  U.  S.  Censuses  of  1850  and  i860.] 


1850. 

i860. 

Geographic  division  and 
State. 

Total 
( thou¬ 
sands] ). 

Per  1000 
popula¬ 
tion. 

Per  cent 
of  U.  S. 
total. 

Total 
( thou¬ 
sands ). 

Per  1,000 
popula¬ 
tion. 

Per  cent 
of  U.  S. 
total. 

United  States  . 

6,385 

275 

100.0 

8,586 

273 

100.0 

Geographic  Division : 

New  England  . 

Middle  Atlantic  . 

East  North  Central... 
West  North  Central.. 

Mountain  . 

608 

1,580 

1,288 

276 

15 

223 

268 

285 

314 

212 

9-5 

24.7 

20.2 

4-3 

.2 

680 

1,936 

i,945 

611 

47 

217 

260 

281 

282 

270 

604 

7-9 

22.5 

22.7 

7-i 

.6 

Pacific  . . 

14 

129 

.2 

268 

3-1 

New  England: 

Maine  . 

134 

229 

2.1 

147 

234 

1.7 

New  Hampshire . 

Vermont  . 

94 

146 

296 

465 

L5 

2-3 

95 

175 

29I 

554 

1. 1 

2.0 

A/f  a  cca  elmsetts  . 

130 

131 

2.0 

144 

1 17 

1.7 

Pliode  Tslnnd  . 

19 

127 

•3 

20 

113 

.2 

C'  onneeticilt  . 

85 

230 

1-3 

99 

215 

1.2 

Middle  Atlantic: 

IMew  "Vnrk  . 

931 

119 

301 

14.6 

1,124 

290 

131 

1.6 

7.8 

7-9 

New  Tersev  . 

243 

1.8 

139 

207 

Pennsylvania  . 

East  North  Central: 

Ohio  . 

530 

544 

229 

275 

8.3 

8.5 

673 

677 

232 

289 

269 

Indiana  . 

285 

288 

4-5 

363 

4.2 

6.1 

Tllinnis  . 

295 

346 

4.6 

523 

305 

MirViicran  . 

100 

251 

1.6 

179 

240 

2.1 

Wisconsin  . 

64 

21 1 

1.0 

203 

262 

2.4 

West  North  Central : 

A/tinneQota  . 

1 

100 

•  •  •  • 

40 

235 

•5 

Town  . 

45 

238 

•7 

190 

281 

2.2 

Missouri  . 

230 

337 

3-6 

345 

292 

4.0 

Dakota  Territory  .... 
"M^Kracl^^  . 

■  •  •  •  •  • 

•  •  •  • 

•  •  •  • 

a 

7 

59 

243 

•  •  •  • 

.1 

TT  q  ncQ  Q  . . 

•  •  •  • 

29 

266 

•3 

Mountain : 

"Mew  Mexico  . 

10 

173 

.1 

34 

368 

•4 

Utah  . 

5 

427 

.1 

12 

297 

.2 

•  •  •  • 

1 

138 

•  •  •  • 

Pacific : 

Win  cninorton 

•  •  •  • 

10 

833 

.1 

Orecfon  . 

10 

709 

.1 

53 

1,013 

.6 

California  . 

4 

46 

.1 

205 

541 

2.4 

a  Less  than  500. 


Chapter  XXXVI. — Swine. 

The  corn-raising  regions  of  Kentucky,  Ohio,  and  Indiana  were  the  centers 
of  commercial  swine  production  in  the  North  in  1840.  Cincinnati  was  the 
leading  pork-packing  city  of  the  country.  In  the  corn-growing  regions  of 
O  no,  Kentucky,  Illinois,  and  Missouri,  hogs  were  kept  in  abundance. 


HOG-RAISING  ON  DAIRY  FARMS  IN  THE  EAST. 

In  the  East,  hogs  were  generally  distributed  over  the  agricultural  area 
with  more  or  less  concentration  in  the  dairy  districts.  In  these  districts  the 
usual  feed  consisted  of  summer  pasture,  refuse  from  the  dairy,  potatoes 
apples,  pumpkins,  and,  towards  the  close  of  the  period  of  fattening  a  little 
meal.  In  Berkshire  County,  Massachusetts,  it  was  said  to  be  usual  to  keep 
1  hog  to  4  cows.  In  Connecticut  it  was  said  that  the  cheapest  method  of 
raising  hogs  was  “  to  take  spring  pigs  and  feed  them  with  the  slops  of  the 
dairy  with  a  little  provender  mixed  in,  until  September;  then,  in  addition, 
boil  the  refuse  potatoes  and  apples  together,  and  feed  for  6  or  8  weeks  • 
afterwards  for  a  few  weeks,  with  provender  scalded.”  2  In  the  greater  part 
of  New  England  it  was  said  that  the  cheapest  way  to  raise  hogs  was  to  keep 
just  enough  to  consume  the  refuse  of  the  farm. 

.  ,In  Herkimer  County,  New  York,  to  fatten  hogs  on  grain  alone  was  con¬ 
sidered  questionable  economy.  The  common  method  pursued  was  to  fatten 
them  on  whey,  potatoes,  apples,  grain,  etc.  In  Ontario  County,  it  was  said 
that,  since  the  temperance  cause  had  been  in  the  ascendant,  many  hogs  were 
attened  on  apples.  In  Putnam  County,  it  was  said  that  “  the  pork  that  is 
made  for  sale  are  pigs,  fattened  or  made  on  the  dairy,  with  but  very  little 
grain  m  fitting  them  for  market.”  3  In  the  upper  valley  of  the  Hudson  hogs 
were  kept  in  large  numbers,  and  were  cheaply  raised  by  pasturing  on  clover 
peas,  and  oats  during  the  summer.  In  eastern  Pennsylvania,  hogs  were  said  to 
depend  mainly  for  subsistence  on  the  refuse  of  the  dairy,  on  pasture  and 
nuts  for  the  summer,  and  on  the  stubble  fields  and  large  orchards  in  the  fall 
until  4  or  6  weeks  previous  to  slaughtering,  when  they  were  fed  liberally  on 
whole  corn.  In  Maryland,  New  Jersey,  Delaware,  and  central  Pennsylvania 
as  well  as  in  the  less  thickly-settled  parts  of  other  eastern  States,  mast  fur- 
mshed  a  large  part  of  the  food  for  swine. 

CHEAP  PORK  PRODUCTION  IN  THE  WEST. 

In  the  West,  except  in  the  more  thickly  populated  regions,  the  majority  of 
farmers  allowed  their  hogs  to  run  at  large  during  the  greater  part  of  the 

off  Report,  Agriculture  of  Massachusetts  (1838),  p.  74 

3  v  v  catent  A0fflce’g Annual  Report  1850,  Agriculture,  180. 

c'-d  ate  ^nc*  S°c*  Transactions,  I  (1841),  p.  154. 

U*  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1850,  Agriculture,  214;  (1849)  P  1 27 


435 


436 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


season  Much  of  the  pork  was  made  without  any  attention  from  the  owner. 
There  was  as  yet  but  a  limited  market  for  hogs,  and  meat  was  plentiful.  In 
summer  they  were  fed  on  pasture  and  allowed  to  run  in  the  woods ;  in  winter, 


Table  6i. — Swine:  Number  in  the  United  States. 

[Source:  U.  S  Censuses  of  1840,  1850  and  i860.] 


Geographic  division  and 
State. 


1840. 


Total 
( thou¬ 
sands ). 


Per 

1000 

popula¬ 

tion. 


Per 

cent  of 
U.  S. 
Total. 


United  States  ... . 

Geographic  Division : 

New  England  . 

Middle  Atlantic  . . . 
East  North  Central. 
West  North  Central 

Mountain  . 

Pacific  . 

New  England: 

Maine  . . . 

New  Hampshire  . . . 

Vermont  . 

Massachusetts  . 

Rhode  Island  . 

Connecticut  . 

Middle  Atlantic: 

New  York  . 

New  Jersey  . . 

Pennsylvania  . 

East  North  Central: 

Ohio  . 

Indiana  . 

Illinois  . 

Michigan  . 

Wisconsin  . 

West  North  Central: 

Minnesota  . 

Iowa  . 

Missouri  . 

Dakota  Territory  . 

Nebraska  . 

Kansas  . 

Mountain : 

New  Mexico . 

Utah  . 

Nevada  . 

Pacific : 

Washington  . 

Oregon  . 

California  . 


26,301 

749 

3,665 

5,566 

1,376 


i,54i 

335 

810 

i,903 

3,224 


117 

122 

204 

143 

3i 

132 

1,900 

261 

1,504 

2,100 

1,624 

i,495 

296 

5i 


105 

1,271 


234 

428 

698 

194 

282 

426 

782 

700 

872 

1,382 

2,367 

3,140 

1,394 

1,660 


2,433 

3.313 


100.0 

2.8 
13-9 
21.2 
5-2 


1850. 

i860. 

Total 
( thou¬ 
sands ) . 

Per 

1000 

popula¬ 

tion. 

Per 

cent  of 
U.  S. 
total. 

Total 
(thou¬ 
sands)  . 

Per 

1000 

popula¬ 

tion. 

Per 
cent  0: 
U.  S. 
total. 

30,354 

1,309 

100.0 

33,513 

1,066 

100. C 

36l 

133 

1.2 

326 

104 

I.( 

2,309 

391 

7.6 

2,178 

292 

6.' 

6,510 

1,439 

21.4 

8,560 

1,236 

25-: 

2,027 

2,302 

6.7 

3,554 

1,638 

10. ( 

8 

113 

21 

Il8 

.] 

33 

312 

.  I 

544 

1,226 

I.< 

55 

94 

.2 

55 

87 

63 

200 

.2 

52 

159 

• 

66 

211 

.2 

53 

l68 

. 

81 

82 

•3 

74 

60 

. 

20 

132 

.  I 

17 

100 

• 

76 

206 

.2 

75 

163 

• 

1,018 

329 

3-4 

910 

235 

2. 

)  251 

5ii 

.8 

236 

351 

• 

T  1,040 

450 

3-4 

1,032 

355 

3- 

>  1,965 

992 

6-5 

2,252 

962 

6. 

2  2,264 

2,290 

7-4 

3,099 

2,295 

9- 

7  I,9l6 

2,250 

6.3 

2,502 

1,462 

7- 

[  206 

5i8 

•  7 

373 

497 

1 . 

2  159 

522 

•  5 

334 

43i 

1. 

I 

121 

101 

589 

4  323 

1,682 

1. 1 

935 

1.385 

2. 

8  1,703 

2,496 

5-6 

2,355 

1,992 

7- 

a 

59 

25 

880 

138 

1,289 

7 

1 10 

10 

no 

•  / 
T 

80 

7 

167 

4 

521 

6 

55i 

30 

2,274 

.  1 

82 

i,556 

3 

30 

. 

456 

1,201 

1 

.1 
•  4 

.  1 


.2 


a  Less  than  500. 

if  mast  was  favorable,  they  lived  in  the  timber;  if  not,  they  were  fed  a  few 
ears  of  corn.  In  the  more  broken  and  timbered  regions  of  southern  Illinois 
and  Indiana  and  in  Kentucky,  most  of  the  pork  was  made  by  letting  the  hogs 

s  Prairie  Farmer,  III  (1843),  P-  441  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1849,  Agri¬ 
culture,  192. 


SWINE 


437 


run  at  large  until  nearly  2  years  old.  About  6  weeks  before  Christmas  they 
were  hunted  out  of  the  woods  and  bottoms,  and  a  dozen  or  more  were  put  in  a 
rail  pen  or  turned  into  the  nearest  corn  field  to  fatten.6 

HOG  RAISING  IN  THE  CORN  BELT. 

In  the  corn-growing  regions  of  Kentucky,  Ohio,  and  other  western  States 
corn  was  more  commonly  used  in  the  feeding  of  hogs.  It  was  generally  con¬ 
ceded  that  as  land  was  cheap  and  labor  dear  in  the  West,  little  care  could  be 
given  to  the  feeding  of  hogs.  In  the  bluegrass  region  of  Kentucky,  it  was 
common  to  pasture  hogs  on  clover,  rye,  or  oats  during  the  summer,  and  in  the 
winter  to  have  them  follow  the  feeding  cattle — 2  hogs  for  each  full-fed  steer 
or  1  for  each  half-fed  steer.7  The  practice  of  “  hogging  down  ”  corn,  turning 
the  hogs  into  a  field  of  standing  corn  and  allowing  them  to  do  their  own  har¬ 
vesting,  had  been  prevalent  in  Indiana,  more  especially  in  alluvial  districts 
like  that  of  the  Wabash.8  “  Hogging  down  ”  required  a  minimum  of  labor, 
and  returned  the  manure  to  the  soil. 

Hogs  in  the  West  were  usually  raised  and  fattened  on  the  same  farm ;  but 
in  some  of  the  best  corn-growing  districts,  as  in  the  valleys  of  the  Miami  and 
Scioto,  feeders  purchased  lean  hogs  from  farmers  living  back  from  the  river 
and  fattened  them  along  with  the  cattle.  Cincinnati,  located  in  the  center  of 
a  large  corn-growing  and  hog-raising  region,  had  become  the  great  hog-pack¬ 
ing  market  of  the  country.  Cincinnati  hams  were  known  throughout  the  East 
and  the  South  and  in  foreign  markets.  Louisville,  St.  Louis,  and  other  Miss¬ 
issippi  points  were  hog-packing  centers. 

DECLINE  OF  SWINE  RAISING  IN  THE  EAST,  1840  TO  1850. 

The  census  of  1850  showed  that  the  number  of  hogs  in  the  country  had 
increased  from  26,301,000  to  30,354,000  during  the  previous  decade.  Every 
northern  State  east  of  Ohio  showed  a  considerable  decrease  in  number  of 
hogs.  In  New  England,  the  decline  was  over  50  per  cent — from  749,000  to 
348,000.  In  New  York,  the  rate  of  decrease  was  little  less.  In  Ohio,  the 
number  of  hogs  was  nearly  the  same  as  in  1840.  To  the  westward,  on  the 
other  hand,  every  State  showed  a  considerable  increase.  The  centers  of 
production  were  much  the  same  as  in  1840.  Hogs  had  obviously  become  more 
numerous  in  the  corn-growing  and  newly-settled  region  of  the  West,  and  less 
numerous  in  the  dairy  regions  of  the  East  (see  figs.  107,  108). 

The  causes  of  the  decline  of  swine-raising  in  the  East  received  but  slight 
attention  in  the  current  literature  of  the  day.  A  writer  in  Worcester  County, 
Massachusetts,  in  1850,  noted  a  25  per  cent  decrease  in  the  number  of  hogs 
in  that  State  in  the  preceding  decade,  resulting  from  increased  demand  for 
corn  for  feeding  to  cows  and  from  the  loss  of  the  dairy  waste,  now  that  whole 
milk  was  marketed.9  A  New  Hampshire  writer  in  1852  told  of  a  large  decrease 


6  Prairie  Farmer ,  VIII  (1848),  p.  52. 

7  Beatty,  Essays  on  Practical  Agriculture,  268. 

8  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1853,  Agriculture,  51. 

9  Ibid.,  1850,  Agriculture,  273. 


438 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


Swine  were  an  important  source  of  income  in  the  East  in  1840.  In  the  West 
cheap  corn,  abundant  mast  and  free  range  made  the  production  of  pork  very  cheap. 


During  the  forties  the  number  of  swine  declined  in  every  northern  state  east 
of  Ohio.  In  the  West  there  was  a  small  increase.  Swine  were  especially  nu¬ 
merous  in  the  corn  region  of  the  Ohio  valley. 


SWINE 


439 


in  hog-raising  in  most  sections  of  that  state  during  the  preceding  15  or  20 
years,  which  he  explained  as  follows : 10 

“  The  average  price  of  corn,  oats  and  potatoes  has  been  for  many  years  past  too 

high  to  allow  their  being  profitably  fed  to  swine . It  seems  to  be  conceded  by  our 

people  generally  that  with  the  price  of  corn  for  a  number  of  years  past,  and  with  the 
breeds  of  hogs  which  have  usually  been  kept,  that  we  can  not  sucessfully  compete 
with  the  Western  farmers  in  pork-raising.” 

Another  writer  on  New  England  agriculture  in  1861  observed :*  11 

“The  number  of  swine  raised,  and  the  quantity  of  pork  made  in  New  England,  is 
far  less  than  formerly.  The  high  price  of  grain  here,  and  the  ease  with  which  the 
still-slop-fed  hogs  of  the  West  are  rushed  from  the  Mississippi  to  the  Atlantic,  have 
rendered  the  raising  of  hogs  for  market  generally  an  unprofitable  undertaking.  Salt 
pork  is  not  made  the  unvarying  staple  upon  the  farmer’s  table  as  it  formerly  was, 
although  still  a  most  important  element  in  New  England  housekeeping.  The  thicker 
settling  of  the  country,  and  the  more  frequent  interspersion  of  villages,  leads  to  a  more 
general  distribution  of  fresh  meats,  so  that  the  farmers  are  not  now,  as  formerly,  so 
entirely  dependent  on  the  meat  of  their  own  killing  and  their  own  pork  barrels.” 

In  summary,  it  appears  that  the  causes  of  decline  of  hog-raising  in  the 
East  were:  (1)  in  the  increased  attention  to  dairying;  (2)  the  importation 
of  western  pork;  (3)  the  general  improvement  in  the  New  England  field 
system.  In  addition,  the  supply  of  potatoes,  one  of  the  chief  feeds  for  the 
eastern  hogs,  had  been  cut  in  half  since  the  appearance  of  the  blight.  Corn 
and  other  grains  had  risen  in  value.  Dairying  gave  a  better  return  for  the 
time  and  feed  expended ;  6  cents  per  pound  was  the  commonly  estimated  cost 
of  pork  production  in  the  East  in  1850;  in  the  West  but  2  to  2\  cents. 

PORK  PACKING  AT  CINCINNATI. 

In  the  West  the  increase  in  the  number  of  hogs  from  1840  to  1850,  although 
large,  was  not  in  proportion  to  the  increases  in  population  and  in  corn  produc¬ 
tion.  During  the  decade  the  business  of  packing  hogs  had  extended  to  nearly 
all  the  interior  towns  of  any  considerable  size  which  lay  near  means  of  trans¬ 
portation.12  In  Cincinnati,  the  packing  center,  there  were  no  less  than  13 
factories  for  the  conversion  of  lard  into  oil  and  stearin  in  full  operation  in 
1843,  making  from  300  to  2,500  barrels  each  or  100,000  gallons  in  all.13  In 
1849  it  was  estimated  that  16,000,000  pounds  of  pork  would  be  run  that  year 
into  lard  oil.  1,500  coopers  in  the  city  and  the  neighborhood  were  engaged  in 
making  kegs,  pork  barrels,  and  bacon  hogsheads.  Many  of  them  were  farmers 
who  spent  their  spare  time  at  cooperage  or  in  getting  out  hoop  poles.14 

Unlike  cattle,  hogs  could  not  profitably  be  driven  long  distances.  They  were 
generally  fattened  where  raised  and  were  driven  to  market  or  sold  to  drovers 
who  traveled  through  the  country.  In  Indiana,  100  to  200  hogs  were  ordinar¬ 
ily  fattened  by  hog-raising  farmers.  In  many  corn-growing  regions  in  the 
vicinity  of  navigable  rivers  it  was  not  considered  profitable  to  feed  corn  to 
hogs.  Farmers  within  12  or  15  miles  of  rivers  could  not  compete  with  those 

10  N.  H.  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions  (1852),  p.  254. 

11  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1861,  Agriculture ,  260. 

12  Ohio  State  Board  of  Agric.,  4th  Annual  Report  (1849),  P-  13 ;  Prairie  Farmer,  X 

(1850),  p.  166. 

13  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1843,  p.  118. 

14  Prairie  Farmer,  IX  (1849),  p.  14. 


440 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


in  the  interior  where,  because  of  distance  from  market,  corn  was  cheaper.15 
It  was  the  opinion  of  the  Prairie  Farmer  in  1848  that  pork-making  at  a 
distance  of  50  miles  from  market  was  more  profitable  at  $2  a  hundred  than 
raising  wheat  at  80  cents  a  bushel.16 


Fig.  109. — Swine,  i860.  Each  dot  represents  5,000  head. 


During  the  fifties  the  center  of  increase  lay  in  the  region  of  the  Mississippi 
river  and  to  a  less  extent  on  the  Pacific  coast. 

CORN  AND  HOGS  IN  THE  WEST,  1850  TO  1860. 

The  census  reported  an  increase  in  the  number  of  swine  from  30,354,000 
in  1850  to  33,573>°00  in  i860.  All  northern  states  East  of  Ohio,  with  the 
exception  of  Maine  and  Maryland,  showed  a  slight  decline.  In  the  West  there 
was  an  increase,  which,  however,  was  not  in  proportion  to  the  increase  in 
population  or  in  corn  production.  As  the  extension  of  railroads  through  the 
corn-growing  region  opened  up  new  markets,  the  price  of  corn  greatly 
advanced  and  swine-raising  moved  further  inland,  where  corn  was  cheap. 
Of  the  1859  corn  crop,  over  15,000,000  bushels  were  shipped  to  Chicago 
alone.1.  In  the  regions  nearer  to  market,  or  nearer  to  means  of  transportation, 
more  care  was  now  taken  in  the  feeding  of  swine.18  It  is  said  that  3,000,000 
hogs  were  packed  in  the  year  i860.19 

TYPES  OF  HOGS. 

Improved  breeds  of  swine  and  their  crosses  were  fairly  common  in  the 
eastern  States  in  1840.  The  Chester  County  type,  which  had  been  developed 

15 Ibid.,  VII  (1847),  P-  304. 

16  Ibid.,  VIII  (1848),  p.  88. 

17  Chicago  Board  of  Trade,  gth  Annual  Report  (1867),  P-  43- 

18  Ohio  State  Board  of  Agric.,  14th  Annual  Report  (1859),  p.  193. 

19  U.  S.  Census  of  i860,  Agriculture,  p.  cxxxv. 


SWINE 


441 


in  Chester  County,  Pennsylvania,  and  the  Berkshire  were  coming  into  favor. 
The  early  prejudice  which  had  existed  against  the  latter  on  account  of  its 
small  size  and  color  was  gradually  subsiding.  It  was  said  in  Massachusetts 
that  a  shoat  weighing  70  pounds  in  the  spring  and  kept  on  the  slops  of  the 
dairy  and  on  pasturage,  supplemented  by  some  meal,  was  expected  to  weigh 
250  pounds  in  the  fall.  Adam  Beatty,  of  Kentucky,  wrote  in  1844  that  a  hog 
which  followed  full-fed  cattle  would  gain  1  pound  a  day.20  Besides  the  Berk¬ 
shire  and  the  Chester  County  hogs,  other  breeds  which  were  introduced  or 
developed  previous  to  1840  were  the  Warren  County,  Byfield,  Woburn,  Irish 
Grazier,  China,  Grass-breed,  Russian,  Suffolk,  Essex,  etc.  $200,  $300  and 
even  $500  had  been  paid  for  a  pair  of  Berkshire  hogs.21 

THE  COMMON  HOG  IN  THE  WEST. 

In  the  West,  before  1840,  but  little  attention  had  been  given  to  the  type 
ol  hog  used  for  feeding.22  The  common  hog  was  of  an  ungainly  type,  with 
long  legs  and  snout,  a  sharp  back,  of  a  roaming  disposition,  slow  and  expen¬ 
se6  to  fatten.23  For  the  packers  they  yielded  small  hams  and  little  lard  ; 
Bieir  sides  were  too  thin  for  mess  or  clean  pork  and  chiefly  fit  for  bacon’ 
type  was  variously  known  as  "Alligator,”  “  Landpike,”  “  Razorback  ” 
Prairie  Rooter,’  “  Seven-mile,”  “  Hazlenut  splitter,”  etc.  For  the  existence 
that  they  were  forced  to  lead  they  were  well  adapted.  About  1840,  however 
there  was  so  much  talk  about  the  breeds  of  hogs  that  it  was  said,  “  a  stranger 
would  have  thought  that  the  only  business  of  the  country  hereafter  was  to  be 
por  '  raising.  24  It  was  still  considered  necessary,  however,  by  most  farmers 
to  cross  the  improved  breeds  with  a  good  traveling  breed  so  as  to  enable  them 

more  readily  to  feed  upon  the  mast  or  pasture,  and  to  give  them  endurance 
when  driven  to  market. 


CHANGING  STANDARDS  FOR  HOG  BREEDING. 

In  the  early  attempts  to  improve  the  breeds,  a  common  aim  had  been  to 
obtain  large-sized  animals.  A  breed  was  appraised  according  to  the  weight 
which  it  could  be  made  to  attain,  rather  than  by  the  profit  with  which  it  could 
be  fattened  for  the  butcher.25  By  1840,  however,  breeders  were  giving  in¬ 
creased  attention  to  those  breeds  which,  with  a  given  quantity  of  food,  would 
lay  on  the  most  meat.  In  the  West,  in  1850,  it  was  generally  considered  not 
profitable  to  winter  a  hog  more  than  one  season.  Hogs  were  commonly  sold 
at  about  18  months  of  age  at  a  weight  of  200  to  250  pounds.  The  average 
weight  of  hogs  received  on  the  Chicago  market  from  1852  to  i860  was  228 
pounds.20  By  i860  the  long-legged  razor-backed  hog  had  nearly  disappeared 
from  the  corn-growing  region  of  Ohio,  Indiana,  and  Illinois.  Probably  in 

no  one  other  class  of  livestock  was  improvement  so  rapid  during  this  period 
as  in  swine. 


20  Beatty,  Essays  on  Practical  Agriculture,  268. 

21  Cultivator,  VI  (1839),  p.  31. 

22  Ibid.,  VII  (1840),  p.  167. 

I3  Ibid.,  I  (1834),  P.  5. 

24 Prairie  Farmer,  IV  (1844),  p.  2S1. 

26  nu* l * * *-Hvat0^  VI  <i839)>  P-  31. 

Chicago  Board  of  Trade,  3d  Annual  Report  (i860),  p.  38. 


Chapter  XXXVII.— Poultry. 

The  census  of  1840  reports  the  value  of  “  all  kinds  of  poultry  at 
$q  344,000 ;  the  number,  however,  was  not  given.  New  York  State  led  with 
poultry  valued  at  $1,153,000,  Pennsylvania  second  with  $686,000.  Although 
the  production  of  eggs  was  largely  a  side  issue  on  the  farm,  poultry-raising 
had  become  fairly  well  developed  in  a  few  sections  of  the  East.  Rhode 
Island  was  celebrated  throughout  the  country  for  its  fine  poultry.  In  Wash¬ 
ington  County,  Rhode  Island,  all  the  farmers  were  said  to  be  engaged  more 

or  less  extensively  in  the  business.1 

The  egg  trade  of  Cincinnati  in  1845  was  described  as  follows : 2 
«  The  egg  trade  of  Cincinnati  bids  fair  to  rival  the  celebrated  pork  trade  of  that  city, 
to  an  extent  which  will  soon  sink  the  soubriquet  of  Porkopolis  to  that  of  Eggopohs. 

It  is  indeed  enormous — beyond  computation.  One  firm  alone  (Townsend  Sr  Co.)  during 
the  first  six  months  of  this  year,  shipped  to  New  York  234  barrels  of  eggs;  to  Balti¬ 
more,  70  barrels ;  and  to  New  Orleans,  3,976  barrels !  Each  barrel  contains  90  dozen ; 
which  makes  the  aggregate  shipments  4,624,400  eggs!  ....  There  are  five  other  houses 
in  Cincinnati  engaged  in  the  business.  The  foreign  egg  trade  of  Cincinnati  the  past 
year  has  amounted  to  10,700  barrels;  which  is  963,000  dozen,  or  11,556,000  eggs,  the 
aggregate  value  of  this  trade  for  the  year,  according  to  data  here  given,  is  $90,361.50. 
The  business  is  a  very  hazardous  one,  owing  to  the  great  fluctuations  in  the  New 
Orleans  market.  In  the  course  of  the  past  year,  for  example,  western  eggs  have  sold 
there  as  high  as  $22  per  barrel,  and  as  low  as  $3.  In  addition  to  this  export  trade,  these 
establishments  do  also  a  heavy  home  trade.  That  of  Townsend  &  Co.  supplies  regu-  , 
larly  five  steamboats  with  36  barrels  a  trip ;  which,  at  12  trips  a  year,  is  432  barrels.  It 
also  furnishes  constantly  the  consumption  of  several  of  the  largest  hotels,  which  use 
at  least  260  barrels  per  year,  and  does  a  retail  business  amounting  to  not  less  than  33  j 
barrels  per  year.  These  several  amounts  make  725  barrels  to  add  to  the  4,280  barrels 
shipped,  which  gives  an  aggregate  of  5,°°5  barrels,  or  450,45°  dozen,  as  the  annual  [ 
trade  of  this  one  house.  Besides  this,  the  annual  city  consumption  is  estimated  at 
1,213,333  dozen.” 

As  the  railroads  were  extended  new  markets  were  opened  for  poultry 
products.  In  1851  it  was  reported  from  Elgin,  Illinois,  that  a  trader  had  estab-  * 
lished  himself  in  that  city,3 

“  where  he  carried  on  an  extensive  business  this  season,  and  perhaps  made  more  money 
than  any  of  our  heavy  merchants.  His  sole  business  is  buying  poultry,  eggs,  butter, 
vegetables,  etc.,  from  the  farmers  and  sending  them  by  railroad  to  the  city  where 
they  are  quickly  disposed  of.  We  are  informed  that  he  has  paid  more  money  to  the 
company  for  freight  this  season  than  any  other  single  firm  doing  business  with  the 

railroad.”  _ _ _ 

1  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1849,  Agriculture,  98;  1850,  p.  477- 

2  Ibid.,  1845,  P-  349- 

3  Prairie  Farmer,  XI  (1851),  p.  33- 


442 


Chapter  XXXVIII. — Horses  and  Mules. 

TYPES  OF  HORSES  RAISED  IN  NEW  ENGLAND,  IN  OHIO, 

AND  IN  KENTUCKY. 

Vermont,  and  to  a  less  extent  New  Hampshire,  had  long  been  celebrated 
for  their  excellent  horses  of  the  Morgan  breed,  distinguished  by  “  activity 
and  great  strength  in  proportion  to  size,  ability  to  live  and  labor  on  compara¬ 
tively  little  food,  with  remarkable  hardiness  and  endurance.”  1  It  was  reported 
from  Massachusetts  in  1849  that  the  best  and  most  beautiful  animals  of  that 


Fig.  1 10.  Horses,  mules,  asses,  and  burros,  1840.  Each  dot  represents  2,000  head. 
Horses  were  uniformly  distributed  throughout  the  North. 


State  were  from  Vermont  and  New  Hampshire.  Many  of  the  heavy  horses 
used  in  the  East,  however,  were  secured  from  Ohio  and  other  Western  States. 
Eastern  drovers  were  going  West  into  Ohio  or  into  the  mining  districts  of 
Pennsylvania  to  secure  heavy  draft  horses  to  supply  the  eastern  demand.2 
From  Delaware  County,  Pennsylvania,  in  1849,  it  was  reported  that  about 
one-half  of  the  horses  in  the  county  were  raised  on  the  farm  and  the  remainder 
were  procured  from  Ohio  and  other  western  states.3 


1  Cultivator,  new  series,  II  (1845),  p.  256. 

2  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1854,  Agriculture,  27. 

3  Ibid.,  1849,  Agriculture,  126. 


443 


444 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


Fig.  hi. — Horses,  mules,  asses,  and  burros,  1850.  Each  dot  represents  2,000  head. 
There  was  a  comparatively  small  increase  in  the  number  of  horses  between  1840 


and  1850. 


HORSES  AND  MULES 


445 


During  the  period  1840  to  i860,  Kentucky  was  distinguished  for  the  breed¬ 
ing  of  saddle  and  light  horses.  In  1834  Mitchell  reported:4 

“  A  handsome  horse  is  the  highest  pride  of  a  Kentuckian,  and  common  farmers  own 
from  10  to  fifty.  Great  numbers  are  carried  over  the  mountains  to  the  Atlantic  states; 
and  the  principal  supply  of  saddle  and  carriage  horses  in  the  lower  country  is  drawn 
from  Kentucky  or  other  western  states.” 


Table  62. — Horses  and  mules:  Number  in  the  United  States. 


[Source:  U.  S.  Censuses  of  1840,  1850  and  i860.] 


Geographic  division 
and  State. 

1840. 

1850. 

i860. 

Total 
( thou¬ 
sands. ). 

Per 

1000 

popula¬ 

tion. 

Per 

cent  of 
U.  S. 
total. 

Total 

(thou¬ 

sands'). 

Per 

1000 

popula¬ 

tion. 

Per 

cent  of 

a.  S. 

total. 

Total 

(thou¬ 

sands). 

Per 

1000 

popula¬ 

tion. 

Per 

cent  of 
U.  S. 
total. 

United  States  .  k . 

4,336 

254 

100.0 

4,896 

21 1 

100.0 

7,400 

235 

100.0 

Geographic  Division : 

New  England  . 

270 

121 

6.2 

213 

78 

4-3 

259 

83 

3-5 

Middle  Atlantic  .... 

910 

201 

21.0 

869 

147 

17.7 

1,038 

139 

I4.O 

East  North  Central. 

907 

310 

20.9 

1,155 

255 

23.6 

2,039 

294 

27.6 

West  North  Central 

20  7 

485 

4.8 

307 

349 

6.3 

668 

308 

9.0 

Mountain  . 

16 

226 

•  3 

27 

157 

•4 

Pacific  . 

32 

301 

.7 

207 

466 

2.8 

New  England : 

Maine  . 

59 

1 18 

1.4 

42 

72 

•  9 

61 

97 

.  8 

New  Hampshire  . . . 

44 

154 

1.0 

34 

108 

•7 

4i 

126 

.6 

Vermont  . 

62 

214 

1.4 

62 

195 

1.2 

69 

219 

•  9 

Massachusetts  . 

62 

83 

1.4 

42 

42 

•9 

48 

39 

.6 

Rhode  Island  . 

8 

74 

.2 

6 

42 

.  1 

7 

4i 

.  1 

Connecticut  . 

35 

1 12 

.8 

27 

73 

•5 

33 

72 

•  5 

Middle  Atlantic: 

New  York . 

475 

195 

11. 0 

448 

145 

9.1 

505 

130 

6.8 

New  Jersey  . 

70 

189 

1.6 

68 

139 

1.4 

86 

128 

1.2 

Pennsylvania  . 

365 

212 

8.4 

353 

153 

7.2 

447 

154 

6.0 

East  North  Central : 

Ohio  . 

43i 

283 

9.9 

467 

236 

9-5 

633 

270 

8.6 

Indiana  . 

241 

35i 

5.6 

321 

325 

6.6 

550 

407 

7-4 

Illinois  . 

199 

418 

4.6 

278 

327 

5-7 

602 

352 

8.1 

Michigan  . 

30 

142 

•  7 

59 

147 

1.2 

137 

183 

1.9 

Wisconsin  . 

6 

185 

.  1 

30 

99 

.6 

117 

151 

1.6 

West  North  Central : 

Minnesota  . 

1 

144 

17 

101 

0 

Iowa  . 

11 

250 

•  3 

39 

204 

.8 

181 

268 

2.4 

Missouri  . 

196 

5ii 

4-5 

267 

39i 

5-5 

443 

375 

6.0 

Dakota  Territorv  .  . 

a 

21 

Nebraska  . 

5 

171 

.  1 

Kansas  . 

22 

204 

•  3 

Mountain  : 

New  Mexico  . 

13 

223 

.3 

21 

228 

.  3 

Utah  . 

H4 

.  1 

Nevada  . 

3 

242 

1 

98 

Pacific: 

Washington  . 

K 

425 

.  1 

Oregon  . 

9 

637 

.2 

38 

720 

•  5 

California  . 

23 

253 

•  5 

164 

432 

2.2 

a  Less  than  500. 


4  United  States,  296. 


446 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


But  few  heavy  horses  were  bred  in  Kentucky ;  these  were  obtained  chiefly 
from  Ohio  and  Indiana.5 

The  wheat  region  of  western  New  York,  eastern  Ohio,  and,  during  the 
last  half  of  the  period,  Michigan,  were  horse-raising  districts.  It  was  re¬ 
ported  in  1849  ^at  2,500  horses  were  annually  exported  from  Ashland  County, 
Ohio.6  The  expense  of  driving  horses  from  Harrison  County,  Ohio,  to  mar¬ 
kets  on  the  Atlantic  seaboard  in  1854  was  said  to  be  about  $10  a  head.7  Before 
1849  the  market  for  western  horses  had  been  largely  in  the  East  and  South, 
supplemented  by  the  ever-present  demand  of  western  immigrants.  But 
migration  to  California  after  1849  increased  the  demand  for  horses  in  that 
direction.  It  was  estimated  that  during  the  year  1852  at  least  6,000  horses 
left  the  State  of  Michigan  for  the  California  gold  mines.8 

CONFLICTING  STANDARDS  IN  BREEDING— SPEED  VS. 

STRENGTH. 

In  the  agitation  for  improved  breeds  of  farm  animals,  horses  attracted 
their  share  of  attention.  It  was  regarded  as  a  question,  especially  in  the 
Eastern  States,  what  direction  the  improvement  might  best  take.  Should  the 
farmer  breed  for  a  race  horse,  a  trotter,  a  coach,  or  a  plough  horse?9  The 
time  had  been  when  “  an  awkward,  a  dull,  or  even  an  unsound  animal,  pro¬ 
vided  he  was  good  for  draught,  would  find  his  way  to  some  of  the  numerous 
teams  that  traversed  the  country,  and  bring  a  fair  price  ” ;  but  now,  since 
railroads  were  doing  an  increased  amount  of  the  long  hauling,  the  demand  for 
such  horses  was  less.10  The  same  reasons  which  were  doing  away  with  oxen 
were  causing  an  increased  demand  for  better  horses.  Improved  English  draft 
horses  were  introduced  to  a  considerable  extent,  but  too  frequently  improve¬ 
ment  aimed  at  the  breeding  of  fast  horses  rather  than  draft  animals. 

In  the  Eastern  States  there  seemed  to  be  a  mania  for  speed,  an  ambition  to 
keep  up  with  the  railroads.11  One  observer  writes : 

Fifty  years  ago,  when  there  were  no  railways  in  the  country  and  not  very  good 
highways,  before  the  building  and  using  of  light  wagons  and  other  vehicles,  when  the 
principal  uses  of  the  horse  were  to  drag  a  lumbering  coach  six  miles  an  hour — as  fast 
as  it  was  safe  to  go — to  haul  before  cattle,  to  draw  the  farmer’s  family  to  meeting 
once  a  week  and  his  grist  to  mill  twice  a  week,  there  was  small  occasion  for  endeavoring 
to  improve  the  breeds  of  horses  in  this  country.  Now  the  times  have  changed  and  we 
have  changed  with  them ;  railway  travelling  makes  us  seek  railway  speed,  or  the  nearest 
approach  that  we  can  get,  with  horseflesh ;  horses  with  speed  are  indispensable  as 
roadsters,  and  in  horses  for  all  work  at  the  present  day  good  travelling  qualities  are 
sought.” 

Horse  racing  at  the  agricultural  fairs  was  introduced  during  this  period. 

5  Western  Farmer,  II  (1841),  pp.  249,  251;  Indiana  State  Board  of  Agric.,  2d  Annual 

Report  (1852),  pp.  121.  298. 

6  Ohio  State  Board  of  Agric.,  4th  Annual  Report  (1849),  P-  48. 

7  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1854,  Agriculture,  26. 

8  Ibid.,  1852,  Agriculture,  277. 

9  N.  Y.  State  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions,  I  (1841),  p.  303. 

10  Massachusetts,  Transactions  of  the  Agricultural  Societies  1849,  p.  221. 

11  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1861,  Agriculture,  255. 


HORSES  AND  MULES 


447 


RAISING  HORSES  ON  THE  ILLINOIS  PRAIRIE. 

It  was  said  that  good  horses  could  be  raised  on  the  wild  prairie  of  Illinois 
for  $10  a  year.12  Large  droves  were  taken  from  southern  Illinois  and  Missouri 
to  St.  Louis,  New  Orleans,  and  other  southern  markets.  There  was  much 
objection  to  their  small  size,  the  result  of  a  large  mixture  of  Spanish  blood. 
On  the  Pacific  Coast  the  horses  were  largely  the  Spanish  breed,  numerous 
bands  of  which  roamed  the  country.  The  breed  was  slowly  improved  by 
crossing  with  horses  brought  in  by  easterners.13 

Higher  prices  after  1847  tended  to  promote  the  raising  of  horses  in  the 
Eastern  States.  The  movement  from  the  West  to  the  East  and  to  the  South 
continued,  supplemented  by  an  increased  demand  from  the  Pacific  Coast. 
Before  1850  but  few  determined  attempts  had  been  made  to  improve  the 
draft  horse,  but  after  that  date  the  importation  and  improvement  of  draft 
horses  attracted  greater  attention,  particularly  in  Ohio.14 

MULE  BREEDING  IN  KENTUCKY  AND  MISSOURI. 

Kentucky,  Missouri,  and  the  region  around  the  city  of  Columbus,  in  Ohio, 
were  the  chief  mule-breeding  districts  of  the  northern  States  in  1850.15  Fol¬ 
lowing  the  importation  by  Henry  Clay  of  a  jack  from  Spain  in  1832,  the  mule 
had  been  much  improved  in  Kentucky.16  In  1853  mules  were  considered  the 
most  profitable  stock  raised  in  the  bluegrass  region.17  The  mule-raisers  on 
the  good  grazing  lands  of  Kentucky  were  in  the  habit  of  sending  jacks  into 
the  farming  districts  of  Ohio,  Indiana,  and  other  sections  of  Kentucky.  The 
mule  colts  which  were  raised  there  in  small  numbers  by  individual  farmers 
were  purchased  by  the  grazier  at  the  age  of  about  6  months,  and  taken  back 
and  grazed  in  Kentucky.  At  maturity  they  were  sold  to  the  plantations 
of  the  South  18  or  to  the  coal  mines  of  the  East.  So  common  was  this  practice 
that  prices  were  commonly  quoted  for  a  6-months-old  colt,  and  then  for  a  2 
or  3  year  old  mule.19 

The  region  around  Columbus,  Ohio,  was  famous  for  the  fine  quality  of  its 
mules.  It  was  reported  in  1844  that  one  breeder  in  Columbus  sold  annually 
from  his  farm  200  to  300  mules,  most  of  which  went  to  the  Baltimore  market. 
Missouri  mules  were  chiefly  marketed  in  the  South,  and,  after  1849,  in  Cali¬ 
fornia  and  Oregon.20  Throughout  southern  Indiana,  Illinois,  and  Iowa  a  few 
mules  were  raised,  for  farm  use  and  for  sale  in  the  South.21 


12  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1854,  Agriculture,  23. 

13  Ibid.,  1861,  p.  164. 

14  Plumb,  Types  and  Breeds  of  Farm  Animals,  106. 

15  Country  Gentleman,  IV  (1854),  P-  29 7)  Cultivator,  new  series,  I  (1844),  p.  149. 

16  Plumb,  Types  and  Breeds  of  Farm  Animals,  162. 

17  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1853,  Agriculture,  29. 

18  Ibid.,  1849,  p.  179. 

19  Ibid.,  1854,  p.  24;  (1853),  p.  30. 

20  Cultivator,  new  series,  IX  (1852),  p.  370. 

21  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1854,  Agriculture,  p.  24. 


Chapter  XXXIX. — Northern  Agriculture  in 

1860 — A  Summary. 


The  prominent  feature  in  the  history  of  northern  agriculture  from  1840  to 
i860  was  its  dynamic  nature.  It  was  a  period  of  expansion  and  reorganization. 
In  the  West,  expansion  was  stimulated  by  the  presence  of  prairie  lands.  The 
development  of  commercial  agriculture  in  the  prairies  was  stimulated  by, 
and  partly  responsible  for,  the  invention  of  farm  machinery  and  the  construc¬ 
tion  of  railways  to  carry  the  surplus  products  of  the  farms  to  the  eastern  mar¬ 
kets.  In  the  East  it  was  a  period  of  reorganization,  made  necessary  because 
of  (1)  the  competition  of  the  factories  and  of  western  farms  for  the  rural 
population;  (2)  the  competition  from  the  western  farmers  in  the  production 
of  agricultural  staples  such  as  wheat,  wool,  beef,  and  pork;  (3)  the  increased 
demand  of  the  eastern  cities  for  dairy  products,  garden  truck,  and  hay,  articles 
which,  either  because  of  their  bulk  or  perishable  character,  were  not  shipped 
from  the  West  in  competition  with  the  eastern  farmer;  and  (4)  the  improve¬ 
ment  in  farm  machinery  and  transportation. 

THE  CAUSES  OF  WESTWARD  MIGRATION. 

In  the  East  the  frontier  of  agricultural  production  was  still  being  slowly 
pushed  north  into  northern  New  England  and  New  York,  and  into  the  unoc¬ 
cupied  lands  of  Pennsylvania.  But  the  movement  was  slow  and  was  entirely 
overshadowed  in  importance  by  the  movement  of  eastern  people  to  the  prairie 
lands  of  the  West.  To  hew  a  farm  from  the  remaining  untilled  lands  of  the 
East  was  a  long  and  arduous  task,  and  to  purchase  a  farm  already  cleared  and 
improved  required  not  a  small  investment.  It  was  not  strange,  therefore,  that 
the  hardships  and  pleasures  of  a  pioneer  life  in  the  West  seemed  more  desir¬ 
able  than  the  labor  and  saving  necessary  to  acquire  a  farm  in  the  East.  While 
settlement,  in  its  progress  westward,  was  moving  through  a  rough  and  wooded 
region,  the  task  of  clearing  a  farm  in  the  West  was  perhaps  as  difficult  as 
buying  a  farm  in  the  East.  But  now  that  prairie  land  was  open  to  settlement, 
the  attraction  of  the  West  greatly  increased  and  some  of  the  best  farmers  of 
the  East  moved  to  the  prairie  regions.  Migration  from  eastern  farms  was  tak¬ 
ing  place  not  only  to  the  prairies  of  the  West,  but  also  to  the  rapidly  develop¬ 
ing  manufacturing  centers. 

Settlement  and  agricultural  production  had  expanded  rapidly  into  the  prairie 
region  of  the  Mississippi  River  and  beyond.  By  i860,  settlement  extended 
over  southeastern  Minnesota,  Iowa,  and  Missouri,  and  the  eastern  counties 
of  Kansas  and  Nebraska.  California  on  the  Pacific  Coast  was  being  rapidly 
developed.  The  population  of  Illinois  alone  in  i860  was  greater  than  the  com¬ 
bined  population  of  Indiana,  Illinois,  Wisconsin,  Iowa,  Missouri,  and  Minne¬ 
sota  in  1840.  The  total  population  living  in  Ohio  and  the  States  to  the  west, 
which  had  been  4,401,000  in  1840,  had  increased  to  10,112,000  by  i860.  There 
were  more  settlers  in  Kansas  and  Nebraska  in  i860  than  there  were  in  Wis¬ 
consin  and  Iowa  in  1840. 

448 


NORTHERN  AGRICULTURE  IN  i860  449 

TENANCY  IN  THE  EASTERN  STATES. 

Favorable  land  laws  made  it  easy  to  secure  a  farm  in  the  West.  High 
wages,  together  with  low  land  values  and  the  possibility  of  taking  up  new  land, 
made  it  relatively  easy  in  the  West  for  the  poor  man  to  rise  to  the  position 
of  landowning  farmer,  provided  he  were  willing  to  endure  the  hardship  of  a 
pioneer  life.  There  are  no  statistics  relating  to  tenancy  and  landownership 
in  the  United  States  prior  to  1880.  Yet  it  is  evident  that  there  was  a  consider¬ 
able  amount  of  tenancy  in  the  Northern  States  from  1840  to  i860.  This  was 
especially  true  in  the  older  settled  sections  of  the  East.  It  was  reported  from 
Warren  County,  New  Jersey,  in  1843,  that  one-fourth  to  one-third  of  the 
farms  in  that  vicinity  were  rented,  mostly  on  a  share  basis.1  In  the  Genesee 
Valley,  New  York,  the  Wadsworth  estate,  comprising  about  40  square  miles, 
was  entirely  operated  by  tenant  farmers.  Numerous  references  are  made 
in  the  agricultural  literature  of  the  period  to  rented  farms  in  the  Eastern 
States.  In  Ohio,  Nicholas  Longworth  was  reported  to  have  91  acres  of  land 
in  vineyard  in  1844*  nearly  all  of  which  had  been  planted  and  was  cared  for 
by  German  tenants  on  the  share  system.2  In  the  valleys  of  the  Scioto  and  the 
Wabash  Rivers  large  areas  of  land  were  rented  out  on  the  share  system.3  As 
far  west  as  Iowa,  farm  land  was  rented  to  tenants  in  185 8.4  In  Illinois  in 
1859,  when  land  could  be  purchased  for  $2.50  per  acre,  farms  were  let  to 
tenants  for  a  share  of  the  grain.5  Thus  it  would  seem  that  more  or  less  ten¬ 
ancy  prevailed  throughout  the  Northern  States  during  the  two  decades.  Share 
renting  was  the  prevailing  system.  The  number  of  large  farms  was  not  great. 
Exclusive  of  the  border  States,  there  were  in  i860  only  787  farms  over  1,000 
acres  in  size,  and  of  these  262  were  in  California.  Table  63  shows  the  size  of 
farms  in  several  states  of  the  North  in  1850  and  i860. 


Table  63. — Average  size  of  farms. 


1850. 

i860. 

Massachusetts  . 

Connecticut  . . 

Ohio  . 

Illinois  . 

Iowa  . 

98.5 

106.2 

125 

158 

184.8 

93-8 

99-5 

113-8 

145-9 

164.6 

THE  CHARACTERISTICS  OF  WESTERN  FARMING  IN  1860. 

By  i860,  new  centers  of  agricultural  production  had  developed  in  the  West. 
Corn,  hogs,  and  cattle  were  the  most  important  products  of  the  new  agricul¬ 
tural  territory,  with  wheat  as  the  most  important  crop  in  southern  Wis¬ 
consin  and  Michigan  and  northern  Illinois.  From  central  Ohio,  west  to 
central  Iowa  and  western  Missouri,  com  was  the  leading  grain  crop  and 
hogs  and  cattle  were  the  dominating  livestock,  though  sheep  and  horses 

1  Cultivator,  X  (1843),  p.  113. 

2  U.  S.  Patent  Office,  Annual  Report  1845,  p.  31 1. 

3  Cultivator,  new  series,  VII  (1850),  p.  358. 

4  Country  Gentleman,  XI  (1858),  p.  33. 

6  Caird,  Prairie  Farming  in  America,  93. 

30 


450 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


were  also  widely  distributed.  Southern  Michigan  and  eastern  Ohio  were 
the  wool-growing  centers  of  the  West.  Milch  cows  and  butter  produc¬ 
tion  were  as  widely  distributed  as  the  population  of  the  West,  but  the  cheese 
industry  was  scarcely  known  West  of  northeastern  Ohio.  The  agriculture  of 
the  West  was  characterized  by  the  exploitation  of  the  soil  and  by  the  produc¬ 
tion  of  those  crops  and  classes  of  livestock  which  could  be  most  successfully 
marketed.  Beyond  the  limits  of  railway  and  water  transportation,  livestock 
production  predominated  and  in  a  large  measure  a  self-sufficing  agriculture 
was  practiced.  Wheat  enough  for  bread  and  wool  enough  for  clothing  were 
commonly  raised,  and  the  pioneer  housewife  of  this  period  usually  knew  how 
to  spin  the  yarn  and  weave  the  cloth  worn  by  her  family. 

THE  TRANSFORMATION  OF  EASTERN  AGRICULTURE. 

The  agriculture  of  the  East  had  been  transformed.  Hay  was  the  leading 
farm  crop  in  i860.  Wheat,  corn,  hogs,  beef  cattle,  and  sheep  had  been  gener¬ 
ally  found  unprofitable  under  conditions  of  western  competition,  though  the 


Fig.  1 13. — Improved  land,  1850.  Each  dot  represents  25,000  acres. 


sheep  industry  was  still  important  in  the  Berkshire  hills  of  New  England  and 
in  western  New  York.  Northeastern  Ohio  and  southern  Michigan  had  become 
the  most  important  sheep  regions  by  i860.  Wheat  was  still  a  leading  crop 
in  southeastern  Pennsylvania  and  in  northwestern  New  York.  Potatoes  were 
grown  throughout  the  country,  with  the  most  concentrated  area  of  production 
on  Long  Island.  The  production  of  tobacco  was  developing  in  the  Connecticut 
Valley.  Hops  were  a  leading  crop  in  the  vicinity  of  Otsego  County,  New 
York.  Dairying  based  upon  hay  and  pasture  dominated  the  agriculture  of  the 
East  in  i860,  with  whole  milk,  butter,  and  cheese  as  the  sources  of  income. 


NORTHERN  AGRICULTURE  IN  i860 


451 


In  both  the  East  and  the  West  agricultural  production  had  been  greatly 
facilitated  during  the  two  decades  by  the  introduction  of  improved  machin¬ 
ery.  The  rapid  development  of  the  prairie  region  would  have  been  impos¬ 
sible  without  the  simultaneous  development  of  agricultural  machinery.  The 
reaper,  the  mower,  and  the  corn  cultivator  contributed  largely  to  the  more 
efficient  use  of  agricultural  labor.  The  development  of  railroads  and  other 
means  of  transportation,  and  in  the  East  the  rise  of  an  urban  population,  were 


Fig.  i  14. — Improved  land,  i860.  Each  dot  represents  25,000  acres. 

During  the  fifties  the  acreage  of  improved  land  in  the  states  east  of  Ohio 
increased  but  little ;  in  the  West  there  was  a  rapid  increase.  In  Wisconsin, 
Iowa  and  Illinois  the  improved  acreage  nearly  trebled.  It  was  comparatively 
easy  to  convert  wild  prairie  land  into  improved  land. 

constantly  developing  new  markets,  and  as  markets  widened  there  was  a 
tendency  for  agriculture  to  become  more  commercial  in  nature.  Increasing 
attention  was  given  in  the  East  to  the  production  of  those  products  for  which 
a  market  was  available  and  in  the  West  to  those  which  would  stand  shipment 
to  a  distant  market.  The  prairies  were  well  adapted  to  commercial  agricul¬ 
ture.  In  the  East  much  work  which  had  formerly  been  done  upon  the  farm 
was  now  being  done  in  the  cities.  More  time  was  given  to  the  production  of 
crops  and  livestock  for  market.  The  question  of  what  was  the  most  profitable 
enterprise  was  therefore  prominent. 

CHANGES  IN  SELECTION  OF  FARM  ENTERPRISES  MORE 
IMPORTANT  THAN  CHANGES  IN  CUL¬ 
TURAL  METHODS. 

There  was  little  change  in  the  thoroughness  of  culture  practised  in  the 
West  during  the  20  years  1840  to  i860.  The  development  of  prairie  lands  and 
of  harvesting  machinery  was  conducive  to  extensive  rather  than  to  intensive 


452  AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 

agriculture.  In  this  new  region  crop  yields  depended  largely  on  the  caprices 
of  nature.  The  pioneer  farmer  with  small  means  and  much  land  depended 
more  on  season  and  less  on  culture  than  the  farmer  of  the  older  agricultural 
regions. 

In  the  East  there  was  considerable  agitation,  and  something  was  accom¬ 
plished  in  the  way  of  improved  methods  of  culture.  The  teachings  of  Jesse 
Buel  and  John  Johnson  were  being  slowly  taken  up.  Farm  buildings  were 
being  made  more  substantial.  The  quality  of  livestock  was  steadily  improving. 
A  more  or  less  definite  cropping  system  with  the  use  of  clover  and  manure  had 
become  rather  generally  adopted  in  the  Northeastern  States  before  i860.  In 
southeastern  Pennsylvania,  where  the  improved  method  of  cropping  had  be¬ 
come  well  established  by  1840,  there  was  little  change  from  1840  to  i860  in 
the  type  of  agriculture  followed.  The  use  of  commercial  fertilizer  was  steadily 
increasing,  especially  in  the  border  States.  The  reorganization  of  agriculture 
in  the  East,  however,  was  brought  about  by  a  change  in  the  crops  produced 
rather  than  by  changes  in  thoroughness  of  culture. 

The  20  years  from  1840  to  i860  were  a  period  of  great  uncertainty  in 
the  selection  of  farm  enterprises  in  the  older  settled  districts  as  well  as  in 
the  new.  The  farmers  who  occupied  the  new  territory  had  to  experiment  for 
themselves.  The  Vermont  farmer  who  moved  into  Wisconsin  or  Illinois  in 
the  early  forties  frequently  brought  with  him  the  nucleus  for  a  flock  of  sheep. 
The  Connecticut  farmer  brought  with  him  the  knowledge  of  cheese-making, 
and  the  Orange  County  farmer  his  churn.  But  the  markets  for  these  prod¬ 
ucts  were  limited  during  the  forties  and  fifties  and  nearly  all  western  farmers 
turned  their  energies  in  the  main  to  wheat  or  corn,  hogs  or  cattle,  whichever 
seemed  for  a  time  to  be  the  most  profitable.  Wool-growing  was  tried  on  the 
prairies  but  did  not  prove  successful.  The  production  of  fruit,  hemp,  and 
silk  were  all  tried  and  abandoned. 

Natural  conditions  of  soil  and  climate,  as  well  as  economic  conditions,  such 
as  the  want  of  capital,  scarcity  of  labor,  and  want  of  markets,  were  influen¬ 
tial  in  determining  the  choice  of  enterprises.  But  whenever  a  branch  of  agri¬ 
cultural  production,  such  as  wheat,  wool  or  beef,  proved  profitable  in  the  West 
and  poured  its  supplies  into  the  eastern  markets,  it  became  necessary  for 
the  eastern  farmer  to  find  some  other  line  of  production,  and,  fortunately 
for  the  eastern  farmer,  the  development  of  an  urban  population  made  this 
possible.  The  uncertainty  in  the  choice  of  farm  enterprises  was  stimulating 
to  thought.  It  tended  to  make  the  agriculture  of  the  period  rational  rather 
than  traditional.  It  stimulated  the  development  of  the  agricultural  press 
and  paved  the  way  for  the  establishment  of  agricultural  education. 


NORTHERN  AGRICULTURE  IN  i860 


453 


1  able  64. — Improved  land:  Area  in  the  United  States. 
[Source:  U.  S.  Censuses  of  1850  and  i860.] 


Geographic  division  and 
State. 


United  States  . 

Geographic  Division : 

New  England  . 

Middle  Atlantic  . 

East  North  Central... 
West  North  Central. . 

Mountain  . 

Pacific  . 

New  England : 

Maine  . 

New  Hampshire  .... 

Vermont  . 

Massachusetts  . 

Rhode  Island  . 

Connecticut  . 

Middle  Atlantic : 

New  York  . 

New  Jersey  . 

Pennsylvania  . 

East  North  Central : 

Ohio  . 

Indiana  . 

Illinois  . 

Michigan  . 

Wisconsin  . 

West  North  Central: 

Minnesota  . 

Iowa  . 

Missouri  . 

Dakota  Territory 

Nebraska  . 

Kansas  . 

Mountain : 

New  Mexico  . 

Utah  . 

Nevada  . 

Pacific : 

Washington  . 

Oregon  . 

California  . 


1850. 

i860. 

Total  1000 
acres. 

*  Per 
capita 
acres. 

Per  cent 
of  U.  S. 
total. 

Total  1000 
acres. 

Per 

capita 

acres. 

113,033 

4.9 

100.0 

163,111 

5-2 

11,151 

4.1 

9.9 

12,216 

3-9 

22,8o6 

3  9 

20.2 

26,766 

3-6 

22,912 

5-i 

20 .3 

41,186 

5-9 

3,768 

4-3 

3-3 

11,122 

5-i 

183 

2.5 

.2 

241 

1.4 

165 

1.6 

.1 

3,446 

7-8 

2,040 

3-5 

1.8 

2,704 

4-3 

2,252 

7-1 

2.0 

2,367 

7-3 

2,601 

8-3 

2.3 

2,823 

9.0 

2,133 

2.1 

1.9 

2,156 

1.8 

357 

2.4 

•3 

335 

1.9 

1,768 

4.8 

1.6 

1,831 

4.0 

12,409 

4.0 

11.0 

14,358 

3-7 

1.768 

3-6 

1.6 

i,945 

2.9 

8,629 

3-7 

7.6 

10463 

3-6 

9,851 

5-0 

8-7 

12,626 

54 

5,047 

5-i 

4-5 

8,242 

6.1 

5,040 

5-9 

4-5 

13,096 

7.6 

1,929 

4-9 

1.7 

3,476 

4.6 

1,045 

34 

•9 

3,746 

4.8 

5 

.8 

-  -  -  T  T 

556 

3-2 

825 

4-3 

•7 

3,793 

5-6 

2,938 

4-3 

2.6 

6,247 

5-3 

. 

. 

2 

4 

. 

. . . 

119 

4.1 

•  •  • 

. 

405 

3-8 

166 

2.7 

#2 

150 

1.6 

17 

1.4 

77 

1.9 

. . . 

14 

2.1 

82 

7.i 

133 

10.0 

.1 

896 

17.1 

32 

4 

2,468 

6-5 

Per  cent 
of  U.  S. 
total. 


100.0 

7-5 

16.4 

25.2 

6.8 

.1 

2.1 

i-7 

14 

i-7 

C3 

.2 

1.2 

8.8 

1.2 
6.4 

7-7 

5-i 

8.0 

2.1 

2.3 

3 

23 

3-8 

.1 

•3 

.1 


.1 


ITj  IT) 


CLASSIFIED  AND  CRITICAL  BIBLIOGRAPHY 

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL  AIDS. 

Two  bibliographies  of  agricultural  history  prepared  in  connection  with  the 
teaching  of  college  courses  on  the  subject  have  recently  been  published.  Pro¬ 
fessor  Schmidt’s  Topical  Studies  and  References  on  the  Economic  History 
of  American  Agriculture ,  has  a  classified  list  of  monographs  and  general 
secondary  works,  but  is  of  little  assistance  in  discovering  the  widely  scattered 
source  materials.  Part  III  of  Professor  Trimble  s  Introductory  Manual  for 
the  Study  and  Reading  of  Agrarian  History  is  devoted  to  the  United  States. 
It  is  of  the  same  character  as  Schmidt’s  work,  but  with  less  attention  to  tech¬ 
nical  bibliographical  details.  From  Miss  Hasse’s  monumental  Index  of  Eco¬ 
nomic  Material  in  the  Docmnents  of  the  States  of  the  United  States  references 
may  be  obtained  on  the  early  history  of  agricultural  societies  and  on  early 
experiments  in  State  aid  to  farmers.  In  general,  however,  State  documents 
contain  but  little  information  on  agricultural  afifairs  before  1840.  The  general 
historical  bibliography  of  Channing,  Hart,  and  Turner  can  be  used  to  advan¬ 
tage,  particularly  their  lists  of  travels  and  of  local  history.  The  local  history 
of  Massachusetts  is  given  more  extended  treatment  in  Flagg’s  Guide  to  Massa¬ 
chusetts  Local  History .  An  excellent  bibliography  of  Maine  covering  its 
history  to  1870  is  the  Descriptive  Catalogue  of  Willis.  Griffin’s  Bibliography 
of  Historical  Publications  of  the  New  England  States  and  Bibliography  of 
American  Historical  Societies  save  a  vast  amount  of  labor  in  gleaning  the  rare 
articles  of  agricultural  interest  from  these  voluminous  publications.  In  Win- 
sor’s  America, ,  vols.  Ill,  IV,  and  V  are  excellent  critical  essays  on  general 
historical  sources  for  New  England  and  the  Middle  Colonies  in  the  Seven¬ 
teenth  and  Eighteenth  Centuries.  Tuckerman’s  America  and  her  Commen¬ 
tators  provides  critical  material  on  travelers’  accounts.  A  partial  and  not 
altogether  accurate  bibliography  of  early  agricultural  journals  is  contained  in 
a  monograph  by  Gilbert  M.  Tucker,  American  Agricultural  Periodicals. 

GENERAL  COLLECTIONS  OF  SOURCES. 

PUBLIC  RECORDS  AND  STATUTES. 

The  source  material  for  the  early  history  of  American  agriculture  is  not  of 
a  specialized  nature,  but  is  scattered  widely  in  the  source  materials  of  our 
general  and  political  history.  Consequently,  the  worker  in  the  narrower  field 
finds  the  general  collections  of  sources  indispensable.  In  the  seventeenth  and 
eighteenth  centuries  colonial  official  records  contain  a  wide  variety  of  material 
of  importance  to  the  student  of  agricultural  history,  such  as  the  provisions 
of  early  legislation  regarding  land  tenure,  the  regulation  of  wages  and  prices, 
restrictions  on  imports  and  exports  of  grain  and  other  products,  the  regula¬ 
tion  of  common  pastures,  etc.  In  addition,  the  colonial  records  contain  reports 
from  governors  and  investigating  commissions,  which,  although  generally 

454 


CLASSIFIED  AND  CRITICAL  BIBLIOGRAPHY  455 

chiefly  concerned  with  commerce  and  manufactures,  yet  throw  much  light 
incidentally  on  the  kinds  of  crops  and  livestock  raised  and  the  extent  to 
which  farm  products  entered  into  colonial  trade.  The  colonial  records  of 
Massachusetts  Bay  and  the  Plymouth  Colonies,  of  Rhode  Island,  New  Haven, 
Connecticut,  and  New  York  have  been  found  particularly  valuable.  For  New 
York  we  have  not  only  the  Colonial  Laws,  but  the  two  collections  edited  by 
O  Callaghan,  Documents  Relative  to  the  Colonial  History  of  the  State  of 
New  York  and  Documentary  History  of  New  York,  in  which  official  records 
of  all  kinds  are  accessible  in  convenient  arrangement.  In  the  latter  work  the 
tax  lists  of  a  number  of  Long  Island  towns  for  1675  and  1676  are  a  unique 
source  for  the  study  of  seventeenth  century  farming. 

The  Documents  Relating  to  the  Colonial  History  of  New  Jersey  are  in 
general  disappointing.  For  the  latter  State  Learning  and  Spicer’s  Grants  and 
Concessions  of  New  Jersey  presents  the  conditions  of  land  settlement.  In  the 
Pennsylvania  Archives  there  is  little  material  of  agricultural  interest,  except 
the  volumes  of  series  3  (vols.  XI-XXII)  containing  tax  lists  of  a  number 
of  counties  for  various  dates  between  1765  and  1786.  The  great  English 
collection  of  colonial  material,  the  Calender  of  State  Papers,  Colonial  Series, 
contains  many  items  not  found  in  our  colonial  papers,  especially  documents 
dealing  with  the  exchange  of  agricultural  products  between  the  West  Indian 
and  the  continental  colonies. 

In  New  England,  town  records,  containing  principally  the  minutes  of  town 
meetings,  have  in  many  cases  been  preserved  and  published.  The  Records 
Relating  to  the  Early  History  of  Boston,  which  contain  the  records  of  a  num¬ 
ber  of  formerly  independent  townships  are  a  particularly  good  example  of  this 
type  of  source  material.  Land  distribution  and  the  regulation  of  common 
lands  are  the  chief  topics  of  agricultural  interest. 

PRIVATE  COLLECTIONS  OF  SOURCES. 

A  general  view  of  the  problems  of  American  agriculture,  1765-1865,  and 
its  relation  to  our  economic  development  is  presented  in  the  source  materials 
reprinted  by  Callender  in  his  Selections  and  in  his  masterly  introductory 
essays.  Thwaites’s  Early  Western  Travels  brings  together  in  well-edited  form 
the  more  important  narratives  describing  pioneer  life  west  of  the  Alleghenies 
in  the  early  national  period.  For  the  study  of  the  seventeenth  century,  the 
collections  of  Myers  and  of  Jameson  covering  the  earliest  settlements  in  the 
Middle  Colonies  are  indispensable.  Of  almost  equal  value  for  New  England 
is  Young’s  Chronicles  of  Massachusetts. 

PUBLICATIONS  OF  HISTORICAL  SOCIETIES. 

In  the  Collections  of  the  Massachusetts  Historical  Society  is  contained 
much  source  material  on  early  New  England  which  would  otherwise  be 
difficult  or  impossible  of  access,  such  as  letters  and  reprints  of  rare  pamphlets 
dealing  with  the  history  of  the  first  settlements.  The  short  historical  sketches 
and  descriptions  of  towns  which  are  found  in  this  collection,  and  in  those  of 
the  Maine  and  New  Hampshire  societies,  often  contain  valuable  facts  regard¬ 
ing  agricultural  conditions,  particularly  of  the  later  eighteenth  and  early 
nineteenth  centuries.  The  New  York  Historical  Society’s  Collections,  the 


456 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


Memoirs  of  the  Historical  Society  of  Pennsylvania,  and  the  Pennsylvania 
Magazine  of  History  and  Biography  contain  personal  papers,  journals,  and 
diaries,  mostly  of  political  significance,  but  among  them  occasionally  a  first¬ 
hand  description  of  economic  conditions.  In  winnowing  the  grain  of  agricul¬ 
tural  material  from  the  chaff  of  political  and  military  history,  the  machinery 
of  Griffin’s  bibliography  is  of  great  assistance. 

Among  the  newer  societies,  the  Colonial  Society  of  Massachusetts  and  the 
Ohio  State  Archselogical  and  Historical  Society  have  not  only  reprinted  rare 
material,  but  have  published  a  number  of  monographs  in  economic  history 
which  include  considerable  agricultural  data. 

GENERAL  SECONDARY  WORKS. 

There  are  no  sketches  of  agricultural  progress  in  the  general  histories  of  our 
country,  although  a  few  historians,  notably  McMaster,  have  given  attention 
to  agricultural  affairs  in  the  north  in  their  discussions  of  economic  conditions. 
A  general  orientation  in  the  subject  of  our  agricultural  history  before  the 
Civil  War  is  furnished  by  Flint,  in  his  article  Progress  in  Agriculture  pub¬ 
lished  in  Kettell’s  Eighty  Years’  Progress.  More  extended  and  systematic 
treatment  of  the  changes  in  American  farming  from  earliest  times  to  the 
beginning  of  the  twentieth  century  is  found  in  Professor  T.  N.  Carver’s 
Historical  Sketch  of  American  Agriculture,  in  volume  IV  of  Bailey’s  Cyclo¬ 
pedia  of  American  Agriculture.  The  introduction  to  the  volume  on  agricul¬ 
ture  in  the  reports  of  the  Census  of  i860  contains  many  valuable  facts  re¬ 
garding  the  introduction  of  agricultural  machinery  and  the  development  of 
internal  trade  in  livestock  and  grain. 

THE  AGRICULTURE  OF  THE  EARLIEST  SETTLEMENTS. 

SOURCES. 

NEW  ENGLAND. 

The  agricultural  information  in  the  colonial  and  town  records  refers  prin¬ 
cipally  to  the  distribution  of  land,  the  conditions  of  land  tenure,  and  also  the 
regulatory  activities  of  the  legislative  bodies  in  fixing  wages  and  prices.  There 
are  two  valuable  official  reports  which  contain  information  regarding  economic 
conditions  in  New  England  colonies,  the  Narrative  of  the  Commissioners 
(1665)  and  Randolph’s  Narrative  (1676).  Of  a  semi-official  character  are  the 
writings  of  the  leading  men  in  the  Massachusetts  Bay  and  Plymouth  Colonies, 
Johnson’s  Wonder-Working  Providence,  Winthrop’s  Journal,  and  Bradford’s 
History  of  Plymouth  Plantation.  They  set  down  from  personal  observation 
the  facts  of  the  struggle  of  the  earliest  settlers  with  the  soil.  Two  valuable 
descriptions  of  the  early  settlements  containing  agricultural  data  are  Wood’s 
New  England’s  Prospect  (1634)  and  Maverick’s  Brief e  Description  of  New 
England  (1660).  Josselyn’s  Account  of  Two  Voyages  to  New  England  must 
be  used  with  care.  Although  not  accounted  as  thoroughly  reliable  in  handling 
of  historical  events,  Captain  John  Smith  recorded  a  few  valuable  observations 
in  his  Advertisements.  Two  source  accounts  of  Indian  agriculture  in  New 
England  are  Roger  Williams’s  Key  to  the  Indian  Language,  and  Winthrop’s 
Description  of  Maize. 


CLASSIFIED  AND  CRITICAL  BIBLIOGRAPHY 


457 


MIDDLE  COLONIES. 

The  earliest  agricultural  experiments  of  the  Dutch  settlers  in  New  Nether¬ 
lands  are  described  in  Jameson’s  well-edited  collection  of  source  materials. 
The  best  accounts  are  contained  in  the  Letter  of  Isaak  De  Rasieres  (1628), 
the  Letter  of  Rev.  Jonas  Michaelius  (1628),  and  in  the  Representation  of 
A  czv  Netherland  (1650).  More  extensive  and  perhaps  more  accurate  than 
these  selections  is  the  work  of  Van  Tienhoven  ( Information  Relative  to  Tak¬ 
ing  up  Land  in  New  Netherland ),  who  in  1650  was  secretary  of  the  province. 
An  equally  good  source  is  Van  der  Donck’s  Description  of  the  New  Nether¬ 
land,  written  by  the  Sheriff  of  Rensselaerswyck  in  1656.  After  the  English 
conquest,  when  settlement  had  expanded  to  Long  Island  and  the  mainland, 
we  have  Denton’s  Brief  Description,  written  in  1670,  after  a  residence  of  over 
a  quarter  of  a  century.  Two  keen  observers,  Dankers  and  Sluyter,  recorded  a 
number  of  significant  facts  regarding  farming  near  New  York  in  their  Journal 
of  1679-1680. 

The  earliest  agricultural  struggles  of  settlements  on  the  Delaware,  in  the 
colony  of  New  Sweden,  are  described  in  official  reports  of  two  of  its  gov¬ 
ernors,  Johan  Printz  and  Johan  Rising.  For  the  later  English  settlements  in 
New  Jersey,  the  best  source  is  Scot’s  Model  of  the  Government  of  East  New 
Jersey  (1685),  which  contains  many  letters  from  Scotch  colonists.  A  number 
of  pamphlets  were  issued  by  the  trustees  and  proprietors  of  the  provinces  of 
East  and  West  New  Jersey  with  the  purpose  of  stimulating  immigration. 
Such  were  The  Present  State  of  the  Colony  of  West  Jersey  (1681)  and 
Brief  Account  of  East  Jersey  (1687).  The  natural  bias  of  the  authors  must 
be  kept  in  mind  in  using  this  material.  William  Penn  was  a  vigorous  “  pro¬ 
moter  ”  of  his  province  and  wrote  a  number  of  descriptive  tracts,  the  most 
valuable  of  which  are  the  Letter  to  the  Committee  of  the  Free  Society  of 
Traders  (1683)  and  the  Further  Account  of  the  Province  of  Pennsylvania 
(1685).  The  Letter  of  Thomas  Paschall  gives  a  clear  picture  of  pioneering 
in  the  first  few  months  of  the  establishment  of  Penn’s  colony.  Budd,  a  man  of 
importance  in  West  Jersey,  describes  more  settled  farming  in  his  Good  Order 
Established  in  Pennsylvania  and  New  Jersey  (1685).  A  more  ambitious 
undertaking  than  any  of  the  above-mentioned  pamphlets  was  the  Historical 
and  Geographical  Account  of  Gabriel  Thomas  (1698).  Although  written  to 
incite  immigration,  it  is  reliable  for  statements  of  fact  within  the  author’s 
own  experience.  A  similar  observation  might  be  made  regarding  the  Circum¬ 
stantial  Geographical  Description  of  Pastorius  (1700).  The  author,  an  agent 
of  the  Frankfort  Land  Company,  was  well  versed  in  the  agricultural  science  of 
his  day. 


SECONDARY  WORKS— MONOGRAPHS  AND  ARTICLES. 

An  excellent  study  of  the  farm  practices  of  the  American  Indians  is  that 
of  G.  K.  Plolmes  in  Bailey’s,  Cyclopedia .  The  agriculture  of  New  England 
natives  is  described  by  Willoughby  in  his  article  in  the  American  Anthropolo¬ 
gist.  Two  studies  which  bear  on  the  struggles  of  the  earliest  New  England 
settlers  to  get  a  living  from  the  soil  are  Goodale’s  New  England  Plants  Seen 
by  the  Earliest  Colonists  and  Goss’s  The  Hungry  Pilgrims.  On  the  physiog- 


458 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


raphy  of  the  region,  in  which  the  first  settlements  were  made,  Shaler’s  United 
States  and  his  Physiography  of  North  America  are  valuable.  Bulletin  p6  of 
the  Bureau  of  Soils  of  the  U.  S.  Department  of  Agriculture  has  a  good  map 
showing  the  distribution  of  various  kinds  of  soils.  The  text,  however,  is 
rather  too  technical  for  any  but  experts  in  that  field. 

The  terms  on  which  settlers  acquired  land  have  been  given  thorough  discus¬ 
sion  in  a  number  of  monographs.  In  The  Germanic  Origin  of  New  England 
Towns  Professor  Adams  attempted  to  show  the  derivation  of  the  common 
fields,  and  other  features  of  the  New  England  village  community,  from  Teu¬ 
tonic  institutions.  Other  studies  inspired  by  his  genius  are  Andrew’s  River 
Towns  of  Connecticut  and  Egleston’s  Land  System  of  the  New  England 
Colonies.  MacLear’s  Early  New  England  Towns  has  a  chapter  on  land  tenure 
based  on  the  study  of  town  records  of  five  towns  near  Boston.  Studies  of  the 
common  pastures  in  localities  where  they  persisted  into  the  nineteenth  century 
are  Worth’s  Nantucket  Lands  and  Land  Owners,  Jameson’s  Nantuck  and 
Common  Lands  of  Easthampton,  and  Sheldon’s  The  Common  Field  of  Deer¬ 
field.  Local  histories  of  New  England  often  devote  considerable  attention  to 
the  description  of  the  laying  out  of  the  town,  with  maps  showing  the  arrange¬ 
ments  of  home  lots  and  common  fields.  Among  these  are  Burt’s  Springfield 
{ Massachusetts ),  Clark’s  Sturbridge  {Massachusetts) ,  Green’s  Early  Land 
Grants  of  Groton,  Love’s  Hartford  { Connecticut )  and  Steiner’s  Guilford 
{Connecticut) . 

For  the  district  in  New  Jersey  where  New  England  methods  of  settlement 
prevailed  we  have  Hatfield’s  Elizabeth,  Atkinson’s  Newark,  and  Daily’s 
Woodbridge. 

The  characteristic  features  of  land  tenure  in  New  Netherland  are  described 
in  Elting’s  Dutch  Village  Communities  on  the  Hudson  River.  The  Province 
of  New  Jersey,  by  Edwin  Tanner,  has  two  chapters  devoted  to  the  land  system 
of  a  proprietary  colony.  Ballagh’s  Introduction  to  Southern  Economic  History 
contains  a  preliminary  discussion  of  land  tenure  in  the  northern  colonies. 
Perhaps  the  most  valuable  work  in  this  field  for  the  student  of  agricultural 
history  is  Osgood’s  American  Colonies  in  the  Seventeenth  Century,  which  con¬ 
tains  a  thorough  analysis  of  the  land  systems  of  the  New  England  and  the 
Middle  Colonies,  with  contrasts,  comparisons,  and  sound  generalizations. 

EIGHTEENTH  CENTURY  AGRICULTURE. 

SOURCES. 

SPECIAL  WORKS. 

Jared  Eliot’s  Essays  on  Field  Husbandry  in  New  England,  a  collection  of 
six  essays  published  in  the  years  1749  to  1759,  was  the  first  American  work 
on  agriculture.  As  the  author,  the  minister  at  Killingworth,  Connecticut, 
states  in  his  preface,  the  book  was  not  “an  Account  of  what  we  do  in  our 
present  Husbandry,  but  rather  what  we  might  do  to  our  advantage.”  Never¬ 
theless,  it  contains  many  valuable  comments  on  prevailing  practices,  based  on 
close  acquaintance  with  the  habits  of  farmers  in  Connecticut. 

In  1775,  American  Husbandry ,  a  book  of  two  volumes,  appeared  anony¬ 
mously  in  London.  It  was  then  and  is  now  the  best  account  of  the  economic 
conditions  in  general,  and  agricultural  affairs  in  particular,  of  the  English 


CLASSIFIED  AND  CRITICAL  BIBLIOGRAPHY 


459 


colonies  in  America.  Writing  with  clear  and  vigorous  directness,  the  author 
describes  the  soil,  climate,  agricultural  practices,  and  products  of  each  colony, 
from  Nova  Scotia  to  the  West  Indies.  He  was  evidently  a  man  of  scientific 
training,  familiar  from  personal  observation  with  the  agriculture  of  Virginia 
and  Maryland,  who  had  also  visited  Pennsylvania  and  probably  New  England. 
In  a  recent  review  of  American  Husbandry /  Mr.  Lyman  Carrier  has  claimed 
its  authorship  for  Dr.  John  Mitchell,  an  English  physician,  naturalist,  and 
historian,  who  spent  part  of  his  life  in  Virginia. 

William  Strickland’s  Observations  on  the  Agriculture  of  the  United  States 
of  America ,  a  pamphlet  of  74  pages  published  in  1801,  was  also  the  work  of 
an  Englishman.  Strickland  traveled  in  this  country  in  1793  and  1794,  collect¬ 
ing  information  for  the  English  Board  of  Agriculture,  principally  in  regard 
to  land  values,  tenancy,  and  wages.  Richard  Peters 1  2  said  of  him  that  he  paid 
more  attention  to  truth  and  accuracy  than  most  travelers,  but  that  he  had 
some  prejudices  and  was  occasionally  misinformed.  Another  source  of  infor¬ 
mation  which  we  owe  to  English  interest  in  American  agriculture  is  the 
correspondence  between  George  Washington  and  Arthur  Young  and  Sir  John 
Sinclair  ( Letters  on  Agriculture,  etc).  In  response  to  a  request  for  detailed 
information  on  American  conditions,  Washington  in  1791  circulated  a  ques¬ 
tionnaire  among  prominent  farmers  in  Pennsylvania,  Maryland,  and  Virginia, 
the  answers  to  which  he  transmitted  to  England.  The  facts  thus  obtained  were 
detailed,  but  limited  to  only  a  few  farms.  Dr.  Tilton’s  Present  State  of  Hus¬ 
bandry  and  Agriculture  in  the  State  of  Delaware  (1789)  contains  detailed 
answers  to  44  queries  from  Abbe  Tessier  of  France,  transmitted  through  the 
Philadelphia  Agricultural  Society.  Crevecoeur’s  Letters  from  an  American 
Farmer  (1782)  supply  an  idealized  picture  of  pioneer  life  in  Pennsylvania 
and  New  York.  They  are  valuable  rather  for  their  charming  literary  style  than 
for  the  information  which  they  supply  regarding  typical  farm  practice. 

OFFICIAL  RECORDS. 

The  published  records  of  the  various  colonies  afford  little  information  on 
eighteenth  century  agriculture.  Facts  regarding  trade  in  agricultural  produce 
are  contained  in  the  occasional  official  reports  of  colonial  governors.  State  aid 
and  regulation  appears  in  statutes  regarding  sheep,  flax,  hemp,  and  barberries. 
The  county  tax  lists  published  in  the  Pennsylvania  Archives  are  m  effect  a 
partial  agricultural  census,  showing  the  size  of  individual  farms  and  the  num¬ 
ber  of  several  kinds  of  stock  kept  on  each.  The  tax  lists  of  Massachusetts 
for  the  years  1767,  1801,  and  1811,  preserved  in  conveniently  accessible  form 
in  the  State  House  in  Boston,  show  by  townships  the  acreage  of  farm  land 
of  various  kinds,  livestock  kept,  and  crops  harvested.  Connecticut  tax  lists, 
also  unpublished,  are  available  in  an  almost  continuous  series  from  1796  to 
1840,  showing  by  counties  the  acreage  of  several  kinds  of  farm  land  and  the 
number  of  horses,  mules  and  cattle. 


1  American  Society  of  Agronomy,  Journal,  XI  (1919),  pp.  206-211.  More  extended 

treatment  of  Mitchell’s  life  and  works  is  given  in  an  article  by  Mr.  Carrier  in  the 
American  Historical  Association’s  Annual  Report  for  1918,  pp.  219. 

2  Philadelphia  Society  for  Promoting  Agriculture,  Memoirs,  I  (1808),  p.  161. 


460 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


PRIVATE  RECORDS. 

Not  many  farmers  kept  account  books  or  diaries,  but  occasionally  a  clergy¬ 
man’s  journal  of  daily  activities  has  been  preserved,  in  which  the  records  of 
farming  operations  are  interspersed  with  parish  and  personal  items.  Such  are 
the  Journals  (1725  to  1814)  of  Rev.  Thomas  Smith  and  Rev.  Samuel  Deane, 
of  Portland,  Maine,  the  Diaries  (1746  to  1780)  of  Rev.  Timothy  Walker, 
of  Concord,  New  Hampshire,  and  the  Letter  Book  (i743  I75I)  Rev* 

James  McSparran,  of  South  Kingston,  Rhode  Island.  Miss  Hazard’s  College 
Tom  is  based  on  the  account  book  (1750  to  1789)  of  Thomas  Hazard,  a 
large-scale  farmer  of  the  Narragansett  country.  Occasionally  a  manuscript 
account  book  showing  farming  operations  comes  to  light.  Such  is  the  Ac¬ 
count  Book  of  Rev.  Medad  Rogers,  the  minister  of  New  Fairfield,  Connecticut, 
covering  the  years  1789  to  1822. 

BOOKS  OF  TRAVEL. 

In  the  latter  half  of  the  eighteenth  century,  particularly  after  the  end  of 
the  Revolutionary  War,  a  large  number  of  European  travelers  visited  the 
older  settlements  in  the  North  and  recorded  their  impressions  in  books  of 
travel.  Such  books  are  of  widely  varying  value  to  the  student  of  agricultural 
history.  Many  may  be  discarded  as  worthless  because  of  the  manifest  unre¬ 
liability  of  the  author,  or  because  of  his  lack  of  interest  in  economic  condi¬ 
tions.  The  works  of  a  few  are  valuable,  but  their  observations  the  reader  must 
use  with  care,  discriminating  between  hearsay  and  first-hand  material,  and 
between  facts  which  were  exceptional  and  those  which  were  typical.  Per 
Kalm,  a  Swedish  botanist  well-qualified  as  an  observer,  visited  us  in  1748-1750 
and  recorded  his  comments  on  our  farming,  chiefly  of  the  Middle  Colonies, 
in  his  Travels.  Another  trained  scientist,  a  botanist  and  mineralogist,  was 
Johan  David  Schoepf,  who  left  the  record  of  journeys  through  New  Jersey, 
Pennsylvania,  Maryland,  Virginia,  and  nine  southern  colonies  in  his  Travels 
in  the  Confederation  (1783-84).  Among  the  French  travelers  of  the  late 
eighteenth  century,  the  work  of  La  Rochefoucauld-Liancourt  has  by  far  the 
greatest  merit.  His  Travels  Through  the  United  States  of  North  America 
( 1 795)  shows  a  deep  interest  in  economic  conditions  and  painstaking  accur¬ 
acy  in  observation  and  recording  of  details.  Weld’s  Travels  (i795_I797)> 
the  work  of  an  Irish  refugee  looking  for  a  suitable  place  for  colonization, 
contain  many  facts  of  an  economic  character. 

Among  the  observers  in  more  limited  areas,  Timothy  Dwight  has  left  the 
best  records.  His  Travels  in  New  England  and  New  York  was  compiled  from 
voluminous  notes  taken  during  horseback  journeys  in  college  vacations  be¬ 
tween  1796  and  1815.  The  President  of  Yale  College  and  one  of  the  best  edu¬ 
cated  men  of  his  day,  Dwight  not  only  saw  truly  and  recorded  carefully,  but 
he  was  also  intent  upon  knowing  the  causes  of  the  conditions  he  observed,  as 
witnesses  his  interest  in  the  relation  of  the  barberry  to  the  rust  in  wheat. 
Richard  Smith’s  Journal  (1769)  is  a  first-class  source  on  frontier  farming 
on  the  Mohawk  and  upper  Delaware  Rivers.  Acrelius’s  New  Sweden  (1759) 
gives  careful  treatment  of  the  farming  of  the  lower  Delaware,  based  on  the 
personal  observations  of  the  author.  Rush's  Account  of  the  German  Inhabi¬ 
tants  of  Pennsylvania  (1789)  contains  the  observations  of  a  scientist,  a  close 
observer  keenly  interested  in  agriculture. 


CLASSIFIED  AND  CRITICAL  BIBLIOGRAPHY 


461 


SECONDARY  MATERIAL. 

SPECIAL  WORKS. 

A  general  survey  of  colonial  farming  and  farm  life,  with  particular  attention 
to  the  middle  and  southern  colonies,  is  to  be  found  in  Eggleston’s  series  of 
articles  in  the  Century  Magazine  (1883  to  1885).  The  author  has  evidently 
used  a  wide  variety  of  source  materials,  although  few  are  cited,  and  shows  a 
clear  appreciation  of  the  influence  of  economic  factors.  Hedges’s  Development 
of  Agriculture  in  Suffolk  County  and  Onderdonk’s  Ancient  Agriculture  in 
Hempstead  supply  much  information  on  the  farming  of  Long  Island  in  this 
period.  In  Rural  Economy  in  New  England  at  the  Beginning  of  the  Nine¬ 
teenth  Century  the  author  has  discussed  the  influence  of  economic  factors, 
particularly  the  lack  of  markets,  on  the  types  of  farming  and  on  home  and 
community  life.  Phillips’s  Horse  Raising  in  Colonial  New  England  is  a 
well-reasoned  study  based  on  a  wide  variety  of  source  material. 

LOCAL  HISTORIES - NEW  ENGLAND. 

State  and  town  histories  often  contain  significant  paragraphs,  even  chapters, 
on  economic  conditions  in  the  eighteenth  century,  including  data  on  agricul¬ 
ture.  New  England,  on  account  of  the  strength  of  local  feeling  in  that  region, 
is  particularly  rich  in  historical  material.  Of  the  many  histories  of  New  Eng¬ 
land  written  in  the  eighteenth  century,  only  one,  Douglass’s  British  Settlements 
in  North  America  (1749),  the  work  of  a  Boston  physician,  contains  any 
considerable  amount  of  economic  information.  The  author,  a  Scotchman  by 
birth,  is  so  enamored  of  his  adopted  country  that  he  often  exaggerates  its 
merits.  Among  recent  secondary  works  dealing  with  economic  affairs, 
Weeden’s  Social  and  Economic  History  of  New  England  (1620-1789)  is  the 
most  ambitious  undertaking.  It  is  based  on  a  wide  variety  of  source  material 
and  includes  many  agricultural  facts,  but  its  arrangement  is  not  designed  to 
give  a  clear  picture  of  agricultural  progress. 

For  Maine  we  have  a  number  of  valuable  short  sketches  in  the  First  Series 
of  the  Collections  of  the  Maine  Historical  Society,  particularly  those  of 
William  Allen.  North’s  Augusta ,  and  Wheeler’s  Brunswick,  of  all  the  town 
histories,  devote  most  attention  to  agricultural  affairs  in  this  period.  New 
Hampshire  agriculture,  chiefly  timber  farming,  is  carefully  and  intelligently 
discussed  in  the  third  volume  of  Belknap’s  New  Hampshire  (1792).  Two 
town  histories  are  of  exceptional  value,  Hayward’s  Hancock  and  Chase’s  Old 
Chester.  Considerable  information  regarding  pioneer  conditions  in  Vermont 
is  to  be  found  in  the  Appendix  gf  Allen’s  Natural  and  Political  History  of  the 
State  of  Vermont  (1798). 

In  Massachusetts,  agricultural  interests  have  received  most  attention  in  the 
histories  of  towns  of  the  Connecticut  Valley.  Of  first  rank  is  Judd’s  Hadley , 
a  work  based  on  a  wealth  of  manuscript  materials.  Trumbull’s  N ort Hampton 
is  to  some  extent  based  on  Judd’s  manuscript  sources.  Farming  in  the  region 
about  Deerfield  is  described  in  articles  by  George  Sheldon  in  the  Pocumtuck 
Valley  Memorial  Society’s  History  and  Proceedings.  Other  less  valuable 
town  histories  of  this  region  are  Temple’s  Whately  and  Temple  and  Sheldon’s 
Northdeld.  The  rural  life  of  an  interior  township  is  exceptionally  well  de¬ 
scribed  in  Nourse’s  Harvard  and  also  in  Bolton’s  Shirley.  Felt’s  Ipswich, 


462  AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 

Essex ,  and  Hamilton  contains  a  number  of  scattered  facts  concerning  the 
farming  in  coast  towns.  To  understand  the  peculiar  conditions  of  the  island 
of  Nantucket,  resulting  from  the  competition  of  the  maritime  industries  and 
agriculture,  one  should  read  Obed  Macy’s  History  of  Nantucket  (1835)  and 
the  articles  by  Zacchaeus  Macy  and  Walter  Folger,  jr.,  in  volume  III,  first 
series,  Collections  of  the  Massachusetts  Historical  Society.  A.  scholarly  study 
of  rural  life,  especially  in  its  moral  aspects,  will  be  found  in  Charles  Francis 

Adams’s  Braintree. 

The  Connecticut  local  histories  are  disappointing.  Love’s  Colonial  History 
of  Hartford  and  Steiner’s  Guilford  deal  rather  fully  with  the  land  system 
of  the  seventeenth  century.  Larned’s  Windham  County  and  Davis’s  Walling¬ 
ford  have  been  found  useful.  Rhode  Island  material  deals  principally  with 
the  Narragansett  country.  Macsparran’s  Letter  Book  (i743“I75I)  gives  a 
day-by-day  account  of  the  varied  activities  of  a  minister  of  the  Church  of 
England,  including  his  farming.  Updike’s  History  of  the  Episcopal  Church  in 
Narragansett  gives  an  exceptionally  good  picture  of  the  aristocratic  rural  life 
and  the  large-scale  grazing  and  dairy  industry  in  that  district  in  the  eighteenth 
century.  Channing’s  monograph,  The  Narragansett  Planters ,  analyzes  the 
causes  of  the  peculiar  agricultural  conditions  in  the  locality  and  shows  their 
bearing  011  local  politics.  Weeden’s  Early  Rhode  Island  is  concerned  with 
townspeople  rather  than  with  farmers. 

MIDDLE  COLONIES. 

There  is  little  information  to  be  derived  regarding  eighteenth  century  agri¬ 
culture  from  local  histories  of  New  York,  except  those  dealing  with  Long 
Island,  a  somewhat  exceptional  area.  Source  material  is  provided  in  Gardiner’s 
Notes  on  East  Hampton.  Wood’s  Sketch  has  valuable  data  regarding  the 
earliest  settlements.  Onderdonk  s  Queens  County  in  Olden  Times  has  a  few 
items  regarding  eighteenth  century  farming.  Gabriel  s  Evolution .  of  Long 
Island  is  a  scholarly  work,  tracing  the  economic  (principally  agricultural) 
development  of  the  island.  The  general  History  of  the  Province  of  New  Y ork. 
of  Smith  (1762)  gives  a  few  facts  on  agricultural  affairs  in  the  various 

counties. 

For  New  Jersey,  secondary  material  is  very  poor.  The  agriculture  of  older 
counties  of  Pennsylvania  has  received  considerable  attention  in  a  number  of 
local  histories.  The  best  of  these  are:  Ashmead’s  Delaware  County ,  Futhey 
and  Cope’s  Chester  County ,  Ellis  and  Evans’s  Lancaster  County,  and  Watson’s 
Account  of  Buckingham  and  Solebury,  Bucks  County. 

WESTWARD  EXPANSION. 

SOURCES— TRAVELS,  JOURNALS,  AND  RECOLLECTIONS. 

Almost  our  only  records  of  pioneer  farming  in  the  West  which  can  be 
called  source  material  are  the  books  of  travel  and  personal  recollections. 
Doddridge’s  Notes  (1763-1783)  have  a  splendid  account  of  backwoods  life 
in  western  Virginia  and  Pennsylvania.  Michaux,  in  his  Travels  (1805),  com¬ 
mented  intelligently  on  farming  on  either  side  of  the  Ohio.  Evans,  a  “  queer  ’ 
New  Englander,  has  scanty  but  thoughtful  remarks  on  the  farming  of  Western 
New  York  and  Ohio  in  his  Pedestrious  Tour  (1818).  James  Flint’s  Letters 


CLASSIFIED  AND  CRITICAL  BIBLIOGRAPHY 


463 


from  America  (1818-1820)  is  one  of  the  best  accounts  of  the  old  Northwest 
by  a  fair-minded  observer  with  keen  appreciation  of  economic  factors.  Ford- 
hanrs  Personal  Narrative  (1817-1818)  also  shows  a  scientific  spirit  and  is 
reckoned  as  a  reliable  authority.  Faux,  an  English  farmer,  set  down  some 
penetrating  comments  amid  much  that  was  sensational  and  prejudiced. 

Enthusiastic  accounts,  probably  somewhat  exaggerated,  of  the  merits  of 
western  New  York  as  a  farming  country  are  found  in  the  Account  of  the 
Genessee  1  ract  (i79r)>  in  Imlay’s  Western  Territory,  and  in  the  Description 
of  the  Settlement  of  the  Genessee  Country,  1792,  in  O’Callaghan’s  Documen¬ 
tary  History  of  New  York.  Maude’s  Visit  to  the  Falls  of  Niagara  in  1800 
is  reliable  for  statements  of  things  coming  under  his  immediate  observation. 
'I  he  Journal  of  Judah  Colt  (1789-1808)  gives  an  interesting  account  of  the 
daily  work  of  a  pioneer  farmer.  William  Cooper,  a  pioneer  farmer  and 

founder  of  Cooperstown,  New  York,  describes  the  early  life  of  his  settlement 
in  the  Guide  in  the  Wilderness  (1810). 

For  Ohio,  the  Recollections  of  W.  C.  Howells  (edited  by  his  son,  William 
Dean  Howells)  contains  a  vivid  account  of  the  life  of  a  farm  boy  in  the  years 
1813  to  1840.  Rural  home  and  community  life  about  1830  are  described  in 
detail  in  Welker’s  Farm  Life  in  Central  Ohio.  Atwater’s  History  of  the  State 
of  Ohio  (1838)  quotes  facts  and  contemporary  opinion  regarding  agriculture. 
The  Valley  of  the  Upper  Wabash,  written  in  1838  by  Henry  W.  Ellsworth,  the 
son  of  our  first  head  of  the  Patent  Office,  “  booms  ”  prairie  farming.  A  good 
selection  of  source  material  on  pioneer  life  is  contained  in  the  Readings  in 
Indiana  History,  published  by  Indiana  University. 

For  Illinois  we  have  an  excellent  survey  of  economic  conditions  in  Buck’s 
Illinois  in  1818,  a  scholarly  work  with  many  references  to  authorities.  John 
Reynolds,  a  former  governor  of  the  State,  recorded  agricultural  facts  among 
his  memories  of  pioneer  life  in  My  Own  Times.  Wood’s  Two  Years  Residence 
in  the  Illinois  Country  contains  a  concise  account  of  agricultural  practices, 
products,  soil,  etc.  The  History  of  the  English  Settlement  in  Edwards  County, 
by  George  Flower,  Richard  Flower’s  Letters  from  Lexington  and  the  Illinois 
and  Letters  from  the  Illinois,  and  Birbeck’s  Letters  from  the  Illinois  tell  the 
story  of  an  unsuccessful  attempt  about  the  year  1820  to  colonize  the  frontier 
with  English  immigrants.  The  Report  of  Gottfried  Duden,  which  Professor 
Bek  has  translated,  gives  a  comprehensive  and  substantially  accurate  account 
of  conditions  in  eastern  Missouri. 

SECONDARY  MATERIAL. 

The  best  general  survey  of  the  westward  movement  is  given  in  Professor 
Turner’s  Rise  of  the  New  West  and  in  his  article  Colonization  of  the  West 
(1820-1830),  in  the  American  Historical  Review  (1905-1906).  Miss  Mathews 
has  traced  the  northern  stream  of  emigration  in  her  Expansion  of  New  Eng¬ 
land.  Roosevelt’s  Winning  of  the  West  describes  the  passing  of  the  southern 
frontier  folk  across  the  mountains,  giving  an  excellent  account  of  backwoods 
life  at  the  end  of  the  eighteenth  century. 

SPECIAL  STUDIES. 

Descriptions  of  the  physiographic  features  of  the  Ohio  Valley,  with  discus¬ 
sions  of  their  influence  on  agriculture,  are  to  be  found  in  Shaler’s  United 


464 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


States ,  Bowman’s  Forest  Physiography,  and  Brigham’s  Geographic  Influences 
in  American  History.  Monographic  studies  of  the  national  land  system  are 
Treat’s  National  Land  System  (1785-1820)  and  Sato’s  Land  Question  in  the 
United  States.  A  mass  of  facts,  poorly  arranged,  regarding  the  public  lands 
is  contained  in  Donaldson’s  Public  Domain. 

On  the  development  of  internal  trade  in  the  West  there  is  an  admirable 
chapter  in  Callender’s  Selections.  Statistics  of  the  West,  by  James  Hall 
(1836),  has  much  information  on  trade  in  agricultural  products.  The  best 
official  source  is  Andrews’s  Report  of  1854.  A  good  historical  survey  of  the 
commerce  of  the  Mississippi  and  Ohio  is  found  in  the  Report  on  the  Internal 
Commerce  of  the  United  States  for  1887.  Helpful  monographs  are  Benton’s 
Wabash  Trade  Route  and  Gephart’s  Transportation  and  Industrial  Develop¬ 
ment  in  the  Middle  West.  A  particularly  interesting  feature  of  internal 
trade,  the  eastward  droving  of  western  cattle,  is  discussed  in  King’s  Coming 
and  Going  of  Ohio  Droving  and  in  Renick’s  article,  Cattle  Trade  of  the  Scioto 
Valley.  Lippincott’s  Pioneer  Industry  in  the  West  shows  the  importance  of 
household  industries  in  pioneer  agriculture. 

A  few  historical  sketches  have  been  written  of  agriculture  in  Middle  West¬ 
ern  States.  C.  W.  Burkett’s  History  of  Ohio  Agriculture  has  but  little  mate¬ 
rial  on  the  period  before  1840.  Conner’s  Indiana  Agriculture  is  brief  but 
definite.  Flagg’s  article,  Agriculture  of  Illinois,  in  the  Transactions  of  the  Illi¬ 
nois  Department  of  Agriculture  for  1875,  is  a  good  historical  sketch.  Mum- 
ford’s  Century  of  Missouri  Agriculture  draws  largely  from  Duden’s  Report 
in  discussing  conditions  before  i860.  The  beginnings  of  agriculture  in  Michi¬ 
gan  are  summarized  in  Adam’s  Agriculture  in  Michigan.  A  few  scattered 
bits  of  agricultural  history  are  also  to  be  found  in  Fuller’s  Economic  and 
Social  Beginnings  of  Michigan. 

AGRICULTURAL  PROGRESS  IN  THE  EAST,  1800-1840. 

SOURCES. 

PERIODICALS - AGRICULTURAL  AND  GENERAL. 

Farm  papers  are  one  of  the  most  valuable  sources  of  information  for 
changes  occurring  in  the  years  1820  to  1840.  Of  especial  value  are  the  letters 
from  contributors  and  the  market  news.  (A  fuller  discussion  and  list  of 
agricultural  periodicals  published  before  1840  is  found  in  Chapter  XIV, 
p.  193).  Of  the  general  periodicals,  Niles’s  Weekly  Register  (1811-1849) 
seems  to  have  given  the  most  attention  to  agricultural  affairs,  printing  contri¬ 
butions  from  many  widely  separated  localities.  Semiweekly  and  weekly  news¬ 
papers  containing  prices  of  agricultural  produce  are  Boston  Gazette ,  Boston 
Weekly  Messenger,  Boston  Patriot,  and  New  York  Shipping  and  Commercial 
List. 

STATE  DOCUMENTS. 

The  publications  of  the  two  earliest  State  boards  of  agriculture,  the  Memoirs 
of  the  New  York  board  and  the  New  Hampshire  Repository,  help  to  recon¬ 
struct  a  picture  of  farming  practices  of  1820  in  those  States.  With  the  aid  of 
Miss  Hasse’s  Index  a  number  of  short  articles  of  a  historical  nature  may  be 


CLASSIFIED  AND  CRITICAL  BIBLIOGRAPHY 


465 


discovered  in  the  Transactions  of  State  agricultural  societies  and  Annual  Re¬ 
ports  of  the  State  boards  of  agriculture  and  in  Reports  of  legislative  commit¬ 
tees.  The  documents  of  Maine,  Massachusetts,  and  New  York  yield  most. 

Reports  of  unique  value  are  those  of  the  Agricultural  Survey  of  Massachu¬ 
setts,  prepared  by  Henry  Colman,  in  the  years  1838  to  1841.  They  deal  thor¬ 
oughly,  even  minutely,  with  farm  practice  and  household  economy  in  four 
counties,  Essex,  Berkshire,  Middlesex,  and  Franklin.  Colman  collected  mate¬ 
rial  by  questionnaires  and  by  personal  visits  to  hundreds  of  farms.  The  third 
report  is  devoted  to  the  consideration  of  the  culture  of  wheat  and  silk. 

PUBLICATIONS  OF  AGRICULTURAL  SOCIETIES. 

The  publications  of  the  “  literary  ”  agricultural  societies — Massachusetts 
Agricultural  Repository  (1798  to  1832),  New  York  Society  for  the  Promo¬ 
tion  of  the  Useful  Arts,  Transactions  (1801  to  1819),  Philadelphia  Society 
for  Promoting  Agriculture,  Memoirs  (1808  to  1826) — contain  little  informa¬ 
tion  regarding  American  methods  of  farming,  although  they  shed  much  light 
on  the  state  of  agricultural  sciences.  Volume  II  of  the  publication  of  the 
Massachusetts  society  is  exceptional,  providing  in  the  answers  received  to 
the  society’s  questionnaire  of  1807  definite  material  on  agriculture  in  New 
England. 

SECONDARY  MATERIAL. 

SPECIAL  WORKS. 

A  contemporary  description  of  northern  agriculture  of  considerable  value 
is  that  written  about  1813  by  Robert  Livingston  for  the  Edinburgh  Encyclo¬ 
pedia.  Phelps’s  Rural  Life  in  Litchfield  County,  Connecticut,  gives  particular 
attention  to  changes  occurring  since  1800.  In  Bidwell’s  article,  The  Agricul¬ 
tural  Revolution  in  New  England,  the  influence  of  the  home  market  on  farm¬ 
ing  is  discussed  and  the  readjustments  made  necessary  by  western  compe¬ 
tition.  Piper  and  Bort’s  Early  Agricultural  History  of  Timothy  and  Carrier 
and  Bort’s  History  of  Kentucky  Blue  grass  and  White  Clover  in  the  United 
States  are  scholarly  monographs  discussing  the  origin  of  these  important 
forage  plants.  Much  assistance  has  been  derived  from  Dr.  Stine’s  unpublished 
Economic  History  of  Wheat  in  the  United  States.  Livingston’s  Essay  on 
Sheep  (1809)  supplies  important  facts  regarding  the  early  importations  of 
the  Merino  sheep  by  one  of  the  pioneers  in  the  adventure.  Randall’s  Fine 
Wool  Sheep  Husbandry  (1862)  has  a  carefully  prepared  historical  sketch  of 
the  Merino  and  Saxony  breeds,  quoting  sources.  The  U.  S.  Bureau  of  Animal 
Industry’s  Special  Report  on  the  Sheep  Industry  (1892)  has  a  large  collection 
of  historical  material  regarding  American  sheep.  Wright  ( Wool  Growing 
and  the  Tariff)  provides  thoughtful  summaries  of  the  changes  in  sheep-raising, 
relating  them  to  the  progress  of  the  household  and  factory  woolen  industries. 
Facts  regarding  the  decline  of  rural  household  industries  are  presented  in 
Tryon’s  Household  Manufactures  in  the  United  States.  Johnson’s  History 
of  the  Domestic  and  Foreign  Commerce  of  the  United  States  (Carnegie  Inst. 
Pub.  No.  21 5A)  shows  the  importance  of  farm  products  in  our  national  trade. 
Official  commercial  statistics  are  arranged  in  convenient  form  in  Pitkin’s 
Statistical  View  of  the  Commerce  of  the  United  States  of  America. 

31 


466 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


TREATISES  AND  HANDBOOKS  ON  FARMING. 

Almost  a  generation  elapsed  after  the  publication  of  Eliot’s  Field  Hus¬ 
bandry  in  New  England  before  other  books  of  its  type  appeared.  But  the 
interest  of  public-spirited  and  educated  men  turned  to  agriculture  after  the 
Revolutionary  War,  and  the  numerous  treatises  brought  out  in  the  final  decades 
of  the  century  may  be  said  to  mark  the  beginning  of  a  distinctive  literature  of 
agriculture  in  this  country.  For  the  most  part,  the  new  treatises  were  merely 
parapharases  of  standard  English  works.  Such  were  Bowler’s  Treatise  on 
Agriculture  aiid  Practical  Husbandry  (1786),  Spurrier’s  Practical  Farmer 
(I793)>  and  Robert’s  Pennsylvania  Farmer  (1804).  In  Bordley’s  Essays  and 
Notes  (1791)  and  in  Deane’s  New  England  Farmer  (1st  ed.,  1790)  we  find,  in 
addition  to  the  exposition  of  the  best  English  practice,  significant  comments  on 
farming  in  Pennsylvania,  Maryland,  and  New  England.  A  modest  volume 
containing  much  common  sense  advice  is  John  Dabney’s  Address  to  Farmers 
(Salem,  Mass.,  1796).  A  small  pamphlet  by  Hon.  Charles  Thompson,  printed 
anonymously  in  New  York  in  1787  under  the  title  Notes  on  Farming,  contains 
facts  regarding  farm  practice  in  Pennsylvania.  Lorain’s  Nature  and  Reason 
Harmonized  in  the  Practice  of  Husbandry  (1825)  is  the  work  of  an  iconoclast 
bent  upon  upsetting  the  traditional  theories  of  plant  growth  and  nutrition, 
but  lacking  adequate  knowledge  to  correct  them. 

LOCAL  HISTORIES,  GAZETTEERS,  AND  STATISTICAL  ACCOUNTS. 

The  agricultural  material  in  the  town  and  county  histories  relates  for  the 
most  part  to  eighteenth  century  conditions.  (See  p.  461.)  Only  a  few 
local  historians  have  grasped  the  significance  of  changes  in  progress  between 
1800  and  1840.  Thompson’s  History  of  Long  Island  contains  a  short  account 
of  improved  farming  near  New  York,  which  may  be  supplemented  from  Cob- 
bett’s  Year’s  Residence  in  the  United  States  of  America.  New  York  agriculture 
was  critically  examined  and  discussed  by  John  Fowler,  an  English  farmer,  in 
his  Journal  of  a  Tour  in  New  York.  He  spent  two  months  in  the  State  in 
1830.  A  local  history  which  devotes  an  unusual  amount  of  attention  to  agricul¬ 
tural  changes  is  Miller  and  Wells’s  Ryegate,  Vermont. 

The  first  two  or  three  decades  of  the  nineteenth  century  witnessed  great 
enthusiasm  for  the  collection  and  publication  of  geographical,  historical,  and 
statistical  material  of  a  local  character,  in  the  form  of  gazetteers.  The  Amer¬ 
ican  Geography  and  American  Gazetteer  of  Rev.  Jedidiah  Morse  contain 
paragraphs  describing  the  chief  agricultural  interests  of  the  various  States. 
The  Collections  of  the  historical  societies  of  Maine,  Massachusetts,  and  New 
Hampshire  contain  a  large  number  of  descriptions  of  towns  written  in  gazet¬ 
teer  style.  An  attempt  on  the  part  of  the  Connecticut  Academy  of  Arts  and 
Sciences  to  obtain  descriptions  of  towns  in  that  State  resulted  in  the  prepara¬ 
tion  about  1810  of  Dwight’s  Statistical  Account  of  New  Haven,  Morris’s 
Statistical  Account  of  ...  .  Litchfield,  Field’s  Statistical  Account  of 
.  .  .  .  Middlesex  and  Goodrich’s  Statistical  Account  of  Ridgefield,  all  of 
which  contain  first-hand  material  on  agriculture.  Pease  and  Niles’s  Gazetteer 
of  Connecticut  and  Rhode  Island  (1819)  is  one  of  the  best  specimens  of  this 
kind  of  work.  For  Massachusetts  we  have  Greenleaf ’s  incomplete  Geographi¬ 
cal  Gazetteer  (1784),  Dickinson’s  Geographical  and  Statistical  View  (1813), 
and  the  same  author’s  Description  of  Deerfield  (1817). 


CLASSIFIED  AND  CRITICAL  BIBLIOGRAPHY 


467 


The  discussions  leading  to  the  separation  from  Massachusetts  of  the  District 
of  Maine  resulted  in  the  publication  of  two  investigations  of  land  tenure  and 
general  agricultural  conditions  in  that  region,  Whipple’s  Geographical  and. 
Statistical  Viezv  of  the  District  of  Maine  (1816),  and  Greenleaf’s  Statistical 
View  (1816).  The  latter,  the  more  careful  work,  was  based  on  personal 
observation  and  has  statistics  compiled  from  valuation  returns  of  1810.  A 
revised  and  enlarged  edition  ( Survey  of  the  State  of  Maine,  1829)  used  the 
1820  valuation  returns.  For  Vermont  and  New  Hampshire  the  Gazetteers 
of  George,  Thompson,  Merrill,  and  Moore  afford  scattered  bits  of  information 
regarding  agricultural  affairs.  The  gazetteers  of  the  Middle  Atlantic  States 
which  have  here  been  found  most  useful  for  the  study  of  local  conditions  are 
those  of  Spafford,  Gordon,  and  French  for  New  York,  of  Gordon  for  New 
Jersey  (part  II  of  his  History  of  New  Jersey),  Scot’s  Geographical  Descrip¬ 
tion  of  Pennsylvania,  Gordon’s  Gazetteer  of  Pennsylvania,  and  Trego’s 
Geography  of  P ennsylvania. 

THE  PERIOD  OF  TRANSFORMATION,  1840  TO  1860. 

SOURCES. 

UNITED  STATES  CENSUSES,  1840,  1850,  i860. 

The  census  of  1840  was  the  first  in  which  an  attempt  was  made  to  collect 
statistics  of  agricultural  production.  Returns  were  made  by  counties  for  26 
items,  including  the  number  of  livestock  (classified  as  horses  and  mules,  neat 
cattle,  swine,  and  sheep),  the  crops  of  wheat,  corn,  rye,  and  other  cereals, 
potatoes,  hay,  cotton,  wool,  hemp  and  flax,  tobacco,  rice  and  hops.  The  prod¬ 
ucts  of  the  dairy,  the  orchard,  and  market  gardens  were  reported  in  values. 
In  1850  the  scope  of  the  agricultural  inquiry  was  enlarged  and  greater  care 
was  taken  to  insure  accuracy  and  to  correct  inaccuracies.  The  census  of  i860 
was  taken  with  the  same  schedule  used  in  1850.  The  data  in  the  three  censuses 
are,  with  a  few  exceptions,  comparable.  But  few  changes  in  classification 
were  made.  The  date  of  enumeration  for  1850  and  i860  was  June  1.  In  1840 
the  enumeration  began  June  1,  but  the  returns  were  not  finally  complete  until 
January  1,  1842.  In  accuracy  these  early  censuses  compare  favorably  with 
later  enumerations.  Many  complaints  were  made  of  inaccuracies  after  the 
publication  of  the  1840  data,  but  these  were  confined  to  the  population  figures. 
In  the  preparation  of  the  dot  maps  serious  omissions  or  overcounting  in  any 
census  year  would  have  appeared  when  compared  with  the  figures  of  the 
succeeding  or  the  preceding  census.  No  such  anomalous  results  were 
discovered. 

In  the  Introduction  to  the  volume  devoted  to  agriculture  (vol.  1)  of  the 
Census  of  i860  there  are  164  folio  pages  devoted  to  analysis  of  the  i860  figures 
and  to  their  comparison  in  tabular  form  with  the  census  returns  for  1840 
and  1850.  In  addition,  the  Introduction  contains  several  first-rate  historical 
articles  based  on  information  supplied  by  experts  in  various  fields.  Particu¬ 
larly  valuable  are  the  articles  on  agricultural  implements,  the  grain  trade  and 
the  cattle  trade. 

In  the  Census  of  1880  (vol.  Ill,  pp.  133-141)  there  is  a  brief  outline  of  our 
agricultural  history,  by  William  H.  Brewer. 


468 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


UNITED  STATES  PATENT  OFFICE  REPORTS. 

The  annual  reports  of  the  Commissioner  of  Patents  for  the  years  1839  to 
1861  afford  source  material  of  extraordinary  importance.  Beginning  in  modest 
fashion  with  remarks  on  agricultural  machinery,  the  portion  of  the  report 
devoted  to  agriculture  steadily  expanded  until  in  1845  it  included  over  1,000 
pages.  After  that  year  the  agricultural  section  was  contracted,  but  remained 
a  substantial  volume.  The  material  in  the  reports  may  be  roughly  divided 
into  two  classes,  the  economic  and  the  technical.  In  the  earlier  volumes  of  the 
series  a  keen  interest  is  evident  in  the  business  side  of  farming  and  in  the 
economic  relations  of  agriculture  to  manufacturers  and  commerce.  In  the 
years  1841  to  1848  efforts  were  made  to  measure  statistically  the  principal 
crops  of  each  State.  The  estimates  were  based  on  the  census  of  1840.  The 
figures  of  that  year  were  revised  according  to  reports  of  crop  conditions  and 
yield  in  agricultural  periodicals  and  in  newspapers,  and  from  the  reports  of 
volunteer  correspondents  in  a  number  of  States. 

The  movement  of  farm  products  in  internal  and  foreign  trade  is  shown  by 
statistics  of  shipments  and  receipts  at  important  canal,  lake,  river,  and  ocean 
ports.  In  a  number  of  the  earlier  issues  extended  discussion  is  given  to  the 
relative  importance  of  home  and  foreign  markets.  Attempts  were  made  to  com¬ 
pare  domestic  and  foreign  prices  of  our  staple  products.  The  estimates  of 
the  cost  of  producing  wheat,  corn,  and  other  crops  which  were  occasionally 
published,  as  for  example  in  the  volume  for  1847,  are  a  still  further  indication 
of  the  emphasis  placed  on  the  study  of  the  farmers’  business  problems. 

The  science  and  practice  of  agriculture  receive  relatively  greater  attention 
in  the  later  volumes  of  the  series.  Excerpts  from  foreign  and  domestic  agri¬ 
cultural  journals  were  freely  reprinted  in  the  attempt  to  diffuse  and  popularize 
the  revolutionary  discoveries  of  the  age.  New  crops  and  new  methods  were 
advocated  with  little  or  no  regard  to  cost  and  profit  on  the  average  farm. 
Material  of  this  character  duplicates  the  agricultural  periodicals  and  is  of  little 
value  to  the  economic  historian.  On  the  other  hand,  the  voluminous  corre¬ 
spondence  from  farmers  in  all  parts  of  the  country,  describing  their  actual 
farm  practice,  is  a  mine  of  information.  In  1851  and  1852  attempts  were  made 
to  systematize  this  information  by  the  use  of  a  questionnaire.  The  replies 
reprinted  in  the  volumes  for  those  years  are  numerous  and  valuable. 

A  combination  of  economic  and  technical  information  is  to  be  found  in 
the  special  articles  describing  the  development  and  status  of  branches  of  the 
agricultural  industry.  Such  are  Randall’s  Sheep  Husbandry  and  Wool  Group¬ 
ing  (1850,  pp.  129-144)  and  Cist’s  Article  on  The  Hog  Crop  (1847,  pp. 
524-533).  Agricultural  education  and  the  activities  of  agricultural  societies 
are  frequently  discussed.  Of  especial  value  in  this  regard  are  the  volumes  for 
1857  (PP-  !- 5 °)  and  i858  (PP-  92_2I3)- 

PUBLICATIONS  OF  STATE  AGRICULTURAL  SOCIETIES  AND  OF  STATE 

BOARDS  OF  AGRICULTURE. 

Supplementing  the  national  point  of  view  of  the  Patent  Office  Reports, 
the  annual  reports  of  the  State  organizations  enable  the  historian  to  see  the 
agriculture  of  the  period  from  the  local  standpoint  and  to  get  a  firmer  grasp 
of  local  conditions.  Established  rather  for  educational  than  for  administrative 


CLASSIFIED  AND  CRITICAL  BIBLIOGRAPHY 


469 


purposes,  the  State  societies  and  boards  devoted  their  attention  chiefly  to  the 
collection  and  diffusion  of  information  which  they  thought  valuable  to  farmers. 
The  New  York  society  ambitiously  attempted  in  its  first  year  (1841)  an 
agricultural  survey  of  the  State  by  counties.  Circular  letters  containing  a 
wide  variety  of  questions  on  crops  and  cultural  practice,  livestock,  and  its 
management  were  addressed  to  representative  farmers  in  each  county.  The 
replies,  piinted  in  the  Transactions  (I  and  II,  1841,  1842)  do  not  cover  every 
county  and  are  often  fragmentary,  but  nevertheless  they  supply  source  mate¬ 
rial  of  great  value. 

The  New  York  survey  was  regarded  as  so  successful  that  similar  projects 
were  set  on  foot  by  the  societies  in  other  States  soon  after  their  organization. 
The  results  are  to  be  found  in  the  following  volumes  of  the  State  reports : 
Ohio,  1846-1850;  Wisconsin,  1851-1853;  New  Hampshire,  1855;  Maine, 
1856;  Illinois,  1857;  Indiana,  1851-1857;  Iowa,  1857. 

The  addresses  delivered  at  the  annual  fairs  of  the  State  societies  and  some 
of  those  given  at  county  fairs  were  printed  in  the  State  reports.  Most  of  them 
are  valueless,  but  occasionally  the  temptation  to  empty  oratory  was  resisted 
and  the  speaker  gave  a  meaty  summary  of  local  farming  which  is  of  great 
assistance  in  the  interpretation  of  the  multitude  of  scattered  facts  presented 
in  the  county  surveys  and  elsewhere  in  these  reports.  The  “  original  essays  ” 
which  appeared  regularly  in  the  reports  of  Indiana,  Illinois,  and  Wisconsin 
allowed  opportunity  for  extended  discussion  of  particular  phases  of  farming, 
such  as  the  use  of  machinery,  the  breeding  of  horses,  or  wool  growing.  The 
best  of  these  essays  were  based  on  practical  experience  and  are  not  to  be 
confused  nor  compared  with  the  paraphrases  or  quotations  from  text  books 
to  which  the  state  secretary  sometimes  had  recourse  to  fill  his  annual  volume. 

The  talents  and  tastes  of  the  editor,  the  State  secretary,  determined  largely 
the  character  of  the  reports.  The  work  of  Henry  S.  Randall  on  the  early 
volumes  of  the  New  York  reports  set  a  high  standard  for  his  successors.  The 
works  of  Ezekiel  Holmes  and  S.  L.  Goodale  in  Maine,  and  of  Charles  L.  Flint 
in  Massachusetts,  were  equally  notable.  In  the  reports  of  other  States  bad  ar¬ 
rangement  and  careless  indexing  make  difficult  the  use  of  many  of  the  earlier, 
often  the  more  valuable  volumes.  Massachusetts  and  Maine  have  published 
indexes  to  their  series.1  For  other  states,  Miss  Hasse’s  Index  of  Economic 
Material  is  of  great  assistance. 

AGRICULTURAL  PERIODICALS. 

The  most  important  unofficial  sources  for  this  period  are  the  farm  papers. 
In  general,  the  material  which  they  contain  is  similar  to  that  found  in  the 
reports  of  the  State  boards  and  societies.  Articles  of  a  scientific  or  pseudo¬ 
scientific  character  dealing  with  the  theories  of  soil  fertility,  with  plant  nutri¬ 
tion,  etc.,  are  of  interest  chiefly  to  the  student  of  the  development  of  agricul¬ 
tural  science.  For  the  economic  historian  the  letters  from  correspondents  are 
of  outstanding  importance.  They  show  the  condition  of  farming  at  a  specific 
time  and  place,  and  often  are  of  great  assistance  in  revealing  the  forces  which 
were  operating  to  make  agricultural  history.  The  material  which  they  present 

1  Mass.  Board  of  Agric.,  25th  Annual  Report,  1877-78;  Maine  Dept,  of  Agric.,  35th 

Annual  Report,  1892. 


470 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


is  of  course  scattered  and  fragmentary  and  can  be  utilized,  even  with  the  aid 
of  the  detailed  index  published  each  year,  only  by  such  students  as  have 
inclination  and  leisure  for  painstaking  research. 

The  Cultivator,  a  monthly  journal  founded  by  Jesse  Buel  in  1834,  was 
published  continuously  at  Albany  until  1853.  Although  it  changed  hands  with 
the  founder’s  death  in  1839,  the  new  owner,  Luther  Tucker,  the  proprietor 
of  the  Genesee  Farmer,  did  not  substantially  modify  its  form  or  contents. 
Throughout  the  period  The  Cultivator  was  probably  the  best  agricultural 
periodical  published  in  the  East.  In  1853,  Tucker  began  to  issue  in  connection 
with  The  Cultivator  a  weekly  which  he  called  The  Country  Gentleman.  Its 
purpose  was  to  furnish  the  farmer,  in  addition  to  what  was  supplied  by  papers 
like  The  Cultivator,  reading  matter  of  a  more  general  literary  and  news  inter¬ 
est.  The  editors  wrote  in  a  prospectus : 2 

“  We  were  led  to  its  publication  from  the  conviction  that  a  large  class  of  farmers 
and  others  interested  in  rural  life  wished  something  more  in  an  agricultural  journal 
than  it  was  possible  to  furnish  in  the  columns  of  a  monthly.  Horticulture  and  matters 
of  rural  taste,  demanded  more  attention  than  the  limits  of  the  Cultivator  would  allow. 
The  home  education  of  farmers  and  their  families,  the  social  aspects  of  country  life, 
the  pleasures  that  slumber  too  often  at  the  fire-sides  of  country  residents,  all  present 
themselves  as  most  desirable  topics  for  discussion  in  an  agricultural  paper.  A  growing 
literary  taste  demands  articles  of  a  higher  order  than  usually  find  their  way  into  such 
journals.  In  a  weekly  journal  all  these  subjects  may  be  combined  with  strictly  agricul¬ 
tural  matter,  in  such  way  as  to  fit  it  for  general  perusal,  and  the  improvement  of  the 
family  circle,  while  the  paper  will  be  none  the  less  valuable  to  the  farmer.  This  com¬ 
bination,  together  with  a  concise  summary  of  news,  will  supply  a  want  that  is  felt  to  a 
considerable  extent  by  country  gentlemen  and  their  families.” 

The  new  weekly  was  divided  into  four  departments.  The  Farm,  Domestic 
Economy,  The  Grazier,  Horticultural  Department,  and  Fireside  Department, 
an  arrangement  which,  in  addition  to  the  yearly  index,  greatly  facilitates  its  use 
for  historical  purposes.  A  weekly  feature,  Farm  Products  Markets,  gave  a 
review  of  market  conditions  in  a  number  of  the  larger  domestic  and  foreign 
markets,  with  price  quotations  on  staples  such  as  flour,  grain,  provisions,  cattle, 
and  wool.  In  The  Cultivator,  whose  monthly  publication  was  continued  in 
reduced  form,  selected  articles  of  specialized  agricultural  interest  were  re¬ 
printed  from  The  Country  Gentleman. 

Among  a  large  number  of  western  agricultural  journals  appearing  in  this 
period  The  Prairie  Farmer  is  the  best  historical  source.  It  was  distinguished 
among  its  short-lived  contemporaries  for  continuous  publication  under  the 
same  editorship  for  16  years.  Founded  at  Chicago  as  a  monthly  in  1840,  it 
was  published  for  two  years  by  the  Union  Agricultural  Society,  an  organiza¬ 
tion  with  members  in  several  Western  States.  In  1843  the  enterprise  was 
taken  over  by  John  S.  Wright  and  J.  Ambrose  Wight  and  a  new  name,  The 
Prairie  Farmer,  was  adopted.  While  following  in  general  the  plan  of  the 
older  eastern  journals,  The  Prairie  Farmer  has  distinctive  local  color.  Its 
style  is  less  academic ;  it  has  a  breezy  quality  designed,  as  was  its  low  price, 
to  appeal  to  “  dirt  farmers.”  In  the  prospectus  for  volume  IV  (1844)  we  read  : 

“  Its  character  has  become  established  as  being  an  eminently  practical  paper,  owing 
chiefly  to  the  large  proportion  of  matter  supplied  by  its  able  correspondents,  most  of 
whom  are  themselves  farmers,  nearly  three  hundred  in  number,  and  residing  in  all 


2  The  Cultivator,  3d  series,  I  (1853),  p.  9. 


CLASSIFIED  AND  CRITICAL  BIBLIOGRAPHY  471 

parts  of  the  West  Almost  the  entire  western  press  pronounce  it,  for  a  farmer  in  the 
West,  the  best  agricultural  paper  published. 

“  The  contents  in  general  are  as  follows:  Original  correspondence;  Editorial  articles; 
Reviews  of  leading  agricultural  papers,  presenting  their  more  important  parts;  Me¬ 
chanical  department  of  two  pages;  Educational  department  of  about  two  pages'  de¬ 
partments  entitled  Household  Affairs,’  ‘Orchard  and  Garden,’  ‘Veterinary’;  and  the 
last  two  pages  will  be  occupied  with  prices  current,  reviews  of  the  Chicago  eastern 
southern,  and  foreign  markets,  and  with  miscellany.” 

In  1857  the  Prairie  Farmer  was  made  a  weekly,  but  the  experiment  was 
evidently  not  successful,  and  in  1858  it  was  absorbed  by  Emery’s  Journal  of 

Agriculture.  In  its  new  form  the  older  publication  retained  its  name  and  was 
enlarged  and  improved. 


COMMERCIAL  PERIODICALS. 

Two  monthly  periodicals  afford  information  regarding  commerce  in  agri¬ 
cultural  products.  Hunts  Merchants ’  Magazine  (New  York,  1839-1870) 
treated  agricultural  conditions  from  the  business  man’s  point  of  view.  It  fre¬ 
quently  reprinted  short  articles  from  daily  and  weekly  newspapers  discussing 
farming  conditions  in  widely  separated  sections.  Price  quotations  of  staples 
such  as  cotton,  wheat,  hogs,  etc.,  in  the  chief  markets  were  given  sporadically. 

De  Bow  s  Review,  although  modeled  after  Hunt’s  publication,  was  more 
general  in  its  material.  Besides  commercial  affairs,  it  was  designed  as  a 
“  journal  of  agriculture,  manufactures,  internal  improvements,  and  general 
literatuie.  It  was  frankly  a  sectional  journal,  devoted  to  the  interests  of  the 
South  and  the  West.  With  two  interruptions,  from  January  to  July  1849  and 
from  1862  to  1865,  the  Review  covers  the  years  1846  to  1870.  It  is  particularly 
valuable  to  the  historian  of  western  agriculture  for  the  facts  it  furnishes  re¬ 
garding  the  close  commercial  relations  between  the  western  producers  of  grain 
and  h\estock  and  the  southern  cotton  planters.  Both  of  these  publications  are 
well  indexed. 


REPORTS  OF  BOARDS  OF  TRADE. 

For  the  facts  regarding  the  market  distribution  of  staple  farm  products, 
especially  in  internal  trade,  the  best  sources  are  the  annual  reports  of  boards 
of  trade  and  chambers  of  commerce.  In  addition  to  a  review  of  the  year’s 
trade  in  the  principal  commodities,  each  issue  usually  contains  statistics  of 
receipts  and  shipments,  and  price  quotations  by  yearly,  monthly,  or  weekly 
averages.  Particular  attention  was  of  course  given  in  each  city  to  the  branches 
of  trade  in  which  its  business  men  were  especially  interested.  The  reports 
of  the  Cincinnati  Chamber  of  Commerce  contain  many  valuable  facts  on  pork 
packing,  and  on  the  shift  from  river  to  railroad  transportation  of  the  western 
surplus.  In  the  Chicago  reports  the  wheat-trade  statistics  are  particularly 
important.  The  Buffalo  Board  of  Trade  was  keenly  interested  in  the  eastward 
shipments  of  grain  by  canal  and  railroad.  In  its  1869  report  there  is  a  compila¬ 
tion  of  statistics  for  this  trade  covering  the  years  1836  to  1869.  The  Boston 
reports  reflect  the  interest  of  merchants  and  manufacturers  in  the  increasing 
dependence  of  New  England  on  western  breadstuffs.  The  wool  trade,  also, 
is  given  much  attention  in  the  Boston  reports. 


472 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


BIOGRAPHICAL  MATERIAL. 

R.  S.  Elliott,  in  his  Notes  Taken  in  Sixty  Years  (St.  Louis,  1883),  has 
recorded,  in  the  midst  of  a  helter-skelter  of  anecdotal  material,  a  number  of 
valuable  facts  regarding  farm  life  and  farm  practice.  Chapter  VII  contains 
his  recollections  of  farming  in  central  Pennsylvania  about  1840.  Of  particu¬ 
lar  interest  are  his  comments  on  the  introduction  of  agricultural  machinery. 
Later  chapters  describe  pioneering  in  Iowa  and  the  development  of  the 
grain  trade  in  the  West.  C.  W.  Marsh,  the  inventor  of  the  Marsh  reaper,  has 
told  in  his  Recollections  (1837  to  1900)  )  the  story  of  his  boyhood  experiences 
on  a  pioneer  farm  in  Illinois.  Chapter  II  gives  a  remarkably  clear  picture  of 
prairie  farm  life,  implements,  food,  housing,  etc.  Chapters  XI  and  XII  are 
devoted  to  the  discussion  of  the  introduction  of  reapers  and  to  the  events 
surrounding  the  invention  of  the  Marsh  machine. 

SECONDARY  MATERIAL. 

TRAVELS,  GAZETTEERS,  AND  STATISTICAL  COMPILATIONS. 

Owing  to  the  greater  abundance  of  source  material  in  this  period  and  its 
accessibility  in  collected  form,  less  reliance  has  been  placed  on  secondary 
accounts  than  in  earlier  periods.  Gerhard’s  Illinois  as  It  Is  furnishes  an  ex¬ 
ample  of  the  best  type  of  gazetteer,  a  combined  history,  geography,  and  statis¬ 
tical  description.  It  includes  two  chapters  (pp.  271-351),  dealing  specifically 
with  farming.  The  author  was  the  editor  of  a  Gorman  newspaper  published  in 
New  York.  His  statements  are  based  partly  upon  his  own  observations  during 
a  tour  through  Illinois  in  1855,  and  were  verified  and  supplemented  by.  the 
opinions  and  experience  of  a  large  number  of  resident  farmers.  He  utilized 
all  the  available  literature,  including  not  only  books  and  pamphlets,  but  also 
secondary  material,  the  files  of  agricultural  journals,  and  of  local  newspapers. 
The  book  is  well  written  and  well  arranged.  The  keen  interest  of  the  author 
in  the  economic  aspects  of  farming  is  shown  by  his  discussion  of  costs  and 
prices.  He  devotes  a  chapter  (pp.  372-375)  h>  market  prices,  in  which  he 
tabulates  the  prices  of  20  or  more  farm  products  for  January  1856,  as  quoted 
in  the  local  newspapers  of  about  40  Illinois  towns. 

The  Gazetteer  of  Michigan,  compiled  by  John  T.  Blois  in  1838,  follows  the 
standard  form,  giving  a  description  of  local  subdivisions  in  alphabetical  order. 
The  information  on  the  means  of  communication  and  transportation,  roads, 
canals,  and  steamships,  is  more  valuable  than  the  brief  description  of  agricul¬ 
ture.  In  the  appendix  there  are  the  fragmentary  results  of  an  attempted 
agricultural  census  of  1837. 

Hall’s  Notes  on  the  Western  States  (Philadelphia,  1838)  is  an  enlarged 
edition  of  his  Statistics  of  the  West  (Cincinnati,  1836).  It  is  particularly  valu¬ 
able  for  its  discussion  of  the  commerce  of  Western  cities.  Chapters  V  to 
VIII  (pp.  69-109)  are  devoted  to  a  description  of  the  prairies  and  to  the 
discussion  of  theories  of  their  origin. 

James  Caird,  member  of  the  English  House  of  Commons  and  the  author 
of  several  works  on  agricultural  topics,  traveled  extensively  in  Illinois  in 
1858  and  published  his  observations  in  Prairie  Farming  in  America,  (1859). 
It  seems  probable  that  he  was  engaged  by  the  Illinois  Central  Railroad  to 


CLASSIFIED  AND  CRITICAL  BIBLIOGRAPHY  473 

assist  in  exploiting  its  lands  by  familiarizing  prospective  English  emigrants 
with  agricultural  conditions  in  Illinois.3 

TREATISES  AND  HANDBOOKS  ON  FARMING. 

Judge  Jesse  Buel,  the  author  of  The  Fanner*  s  Comp  anion,  was  doubly 
qualified  for  his  work,  having  been  both  the  editor  of  an  agricultural  journal 
(The  Cultivator)  and  a  successful  practical  farmer  as  well.  The  volume, 
which  was  designed  as  a  text-book,  is  laid  out  in  methodical  fashion.  It  is 
composed  largely  of  quotations  and  paraphrases  from  the  best  English  works, 
supplemented  by  material  from  the  files  of  The  Cultivator.  In  this,  as  in 
almost  all  works  of  its  kind,  the  description  of  what  is,  i.  e.,  of  existing  condi¬ 
tions  of  farming,  is  subordinated  to  the  discussion  of  what  ought  to  be. 

Beatty’s  Essays  on  Practical  Agriculture  presents  a  marked  contrast  to 
Buel’s  work.  It  is  composed  of  a  series  of  essays  on  the  cultivation  of  various 
crops,  with  particular  reference  to  farming  in  Kentucky,  the  author’s  native 
State.  The  historical  sketch  of  Kentucky  agriculture,  the  first  of  the  essays, 
is  well  done.  Beatty’s  work  shows  a  wide  reading  of  the  best  English  and 
American  agricultural  literature.  His  keen  interest  in  the  economic  aspects 
of  farming,  in  markets,  prices  and  transportation  costs,  is  evident  in  his  chapter 
on  the  Advantages  of  Manufactures  to  Agriculture. 

MONOGRAPHS. 

Hibbard  s  History  of  Agriculture  in  Dane  County,  Wisconsin,  deals  in 
chapters  I  to  VI  with  pioneer  conditions  and  the  one-crop  period  which  ended 
in  i860.  This  is  a  scholarly  work  compiled  from  source  material,  chiefly  from 
local  newspapers.  It  gives  a  clear  picture  of  the  farming  of  the  period  with 
emphasis  on  its  social  and  economic  aspects.  The  Wheat  Plant,  by  John  H. 
Klippart,  secretary  of  the  Ohio  State  Board  of  Agriculture,  is  an  exhaustive 
treatise  of  international  repute,  in  which  the  author  has  included  a  vast 
amount  of  information  regarding  the  origin,  history,  and  botany  of  wheat. 
Chapter  XIX,  Wheat  in  Ohio,  discusses  the  varieties  grown  in  that  State  in 
i860  and  gives  facts  regarding  their  introduction. 

The  history  of  one  of  the  most  important  kinds  of  agricultural  machines 
is  traced  by  M.  F.  Miller  in  his  The  Evolution  of  Reaping  Machines.  He 
shows  clearly  the  European  origin  of  several  of  the  most  important  features 
of  the  American  reaper.  His  monograph,  compiled  from  secondary  material, 
is  well  arranged.  Its  value  is  enhanced  by  a  number  of  fine  illustrations  of  the 
machines  described.  The  perennial  controversy  between  the  adherents  of  Hus¬ 
sey  and  McCormick  regarding  the  claims  to  the  invention  of  the  reaper  is 
renewed  in  Greene’s  Obed  Hussey  (Rochester,  1912).  The  book  is  a  com¬ 
pilation  of  original  documents,  such  as  contemporary  newspaper  articles, 
personal  correspondence,  and  copies  of  Patent  Office  records  which  tend  to 
support  Hussey’s  claim. 


3  Buck,  Travel  and  Description,  1765-1865,  in  Illinois  Hist.  Soc.,  Collections,  IX,  233. 


1. 

2. 

3- 

4- 

5- 

6. 

7- 

8. 

9- 

10 

11. 

12. 

13. 

14 

IS- 

16. 

17. 

18. 

19. 

20. 

21. 

22. 

23. 

24. 

25. 

26. 

27. 

28. 

29. 

30. 


31. 

32. 

33- 


ALPHABETICAL  INDEX  OF  AUTHORS. 

Account  of  the  Genessee  Tract  (1791)  ('n  Inilay,  Western  Territory  of  North 

America ,  458-481).  ,  f  _  ,  ~  ....  r 

Acrelius,  Israel.  Description  of  the  Former  and  Present  Condition  oj  .  .  .  . 

New  Sweden  (Stockholm,  1759-  Translation  published  in  Memoirs  ot 

Pennsylvania  Hist.  Soc.,  XI,  1874).  ,  .  , 

Adams,  Charles  Francis.  History  of  Braintree,  Massachusetts  and  the  Town  of 

Quincy  (Cambridge,  1891).  _  0  * 

_  Three  Episodes  in  Massachusetts  History  (2  vols.,  Boston,  1892;.  # 

Adams,  Herbert  B.  The  Fisher  Plantation  at  Cape  Ann  (Essex  Institute  Historical 

Collections,  XIX,  (1882)  pp.  81-90).  . 

_ .  The  Germanic  Origin  of  New  England  Tozvns  (in  /.  H.  U.  Studies  in  His¬ 
torical  and  Political  Science,  I,  No.  2  (1882)  ).  # 

- .  Origin  of  Salem  Plantation  (in  Essex  Institute  Historical  Collections,  XIX, 

Adams,  Romanzo.  Agriculture  in  Michigan  (in  Michigan  Pol.  Sci.  Assn.  Publica¬ 
tions,  III  (1899),  No.  7,  pp.  1-40)..  .  , 

Agnew,  Daniel,  L.L.D.  History  of  Pennsylvania  North  of  the  Ohio  and  IV est  of 
The  Allegheny  River  (Philadelphia,  1887).  ... 

Allen  Charles  E.  Some  Huguenot  and  other  Early  Settlers  on  the  Kennebec  in  the 

.  Town  of  Dresden  (in  Maine  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  2nd 

Series,  III,  351-379).-  rr.  ,  ,  _  ,  T.  .  /T  < 

Allen,  Ira.  Natural  and  Political  History  of  the  State  of  Vermont  (London, 
1798.  Reprinted  in  Vermont  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  I,  327-499). 

Allen,  William.  Bingham  Land  (in  Maine  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  1st  Series, 
"yj  j  3  S3 _ 360) 

_ .  Now  and  Then  (in  Maine  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  1st  Series,  VII,  269-287). 

- .  Sandy  River  Settlement  (in  Maine  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  1st  Series, 

IV,  31-40). 

Alton  (Illinois)  Telegraph  (May  11,  1849).  . 

American  Academy  of  Arts  and  Sciences.  Memoirs  (1st  Series,  4  vols.,  Boston, 
1785-1818). 

American  Farmer  (weekly,  Baltimore,  1819-1833). 

American  Husbandry  (2  vols.,  London,  1775). 

American  Journal  of  Science  (192  vols.,  1819-1916). 

American  Museum  (12  vols.,  Philadelphia  1787-1792). 

American  Statistical  Annual  (2  vols.,  New  York,  1854-1855). 

Ames,  Azel.  The  Mayflower  and  Her  Log .  (Boston,  1901). 

Amherst,  First  Church.  Historical  Review,  1889. 

Andrews,  Charles  M.  Colonial  Folkways  (New  Haven,  1919). 

— - .  The  River  Towns  of  Connecticut  (in  /.  HI  U.  Studies  in  Historical  and 

Political  Science,  VII,  Nos.  7-9). 

-  Theory  of  the  Village  Community  (in  American  Hist.  Assn.  Papers, 

XLVII). 

Andrews,  Israel  D.  Report  on  the  Trade  and  Commerce  of  the  British  North 
American  Colonies  and  upon  the  Trade  of  the  Great  Lakes  and  Rivers 
(Washington,  1854). 

Answers  of  Governor  Andros  to  Enquiries  About  New  York,  1678  (in  O’Calla¬ 
ghan,  Documentary  History  of  New  York,  I,  88-92). 

Answers  to  Queries  Sent  from  the  ....  Lords  of  Trade,  1730  (in  N.  H. 
Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  I,  227-230). 

Answers  to  the  Several  Queries  Relating  to  the  Planters  in  the  Territories 
of  His  R.  H.  S.  the  Duke  of  Yorke  in  America  (ca  1669,  in  O’Calla¬ 
ghan,  Documentary  History  of  New  York,  I,  87). 

Ash  mead,  H.  G.  History  of  Delaware  County,  Pennsylvania  (Philadelphia,  1884). 
Assessment  Rolls  of  the  Five  Dutch  Towns  in  King’s  County,  L.  I.,  1675 
(in  O’Callaghan,  Documentary  History  of  New _  York,  IV,  139-161). 
Atwater,  Caleb.  History  of  the  State  of  Ohio  (2d  ed.,  Cincinnati,  1838). 

474 


ALPHABETICAL  INDEX  OF  AUTHORS 


475 


34.  Bacon,  William.  History  of  the  Agricultural  Associations  of  New  York  1791- 

1862  Xl?  N*  Y‘  State  ASric-  Soc.  Transactions,  XXIII,  (1863),  no. 
143-168). 

35-  Bailey ,  Liberty  Hyde  (editor).  Cyclopedia  of  American  Agriculture  (4  vols 
N.  Y.,  1907-1909). 

36.  .  Education  by  Means  of  Agriculture  in  Bailey,  Cyclopedia  of  American 

Agriculture,  IV,  355-477- 

37-  allagh,  James  Curtis.  Introduction  to  Southern  Economic  History — The  Land 
O  A  System  (in  American  Hist.  Assn.  Report,  (1897),  pp.  101-129). 

3«.  Ballou,  Adin.  History  of  Milford,  Massachusetts  (Boston,  1882). 

39.  Baltimore  and  Ohio  Railroad  Company  33d  Annual  Report  (1859). 

40.  Barbour,  James.  Agricultural  Associations  and  Agricultural  Schools  (in  N.  Y. 

Bd.  of  Agric.  Memoirs,  III  (1826),  pp.  506-511). 

41.  Barry,  William.  History  of  Framingham,  Massachusetts  (Boston,  1847). 

42.  Bartram,  John.  Observations  in  Travels  from  Pennsylvania  to  Onondaiqo  etc 

(London,  1751.  Reprinted  Geneva,  N.  Y.,  1895). 

43-  Beatty,  Adam.  Essays  on  Practical  Agriculture  (Maysville,  Ky.,  1844). 

44.  Beckley,  Hosea.  History  of  Vermont  (Brattleboro,  Vt.,  1846). 

45-  Beers,  W.  H.  &  Co.  (publishers).  History  of  Montgomery  County,  Ohio  (Chicago, 
1882) . 

46.  Bek,  W.  G.  Followers  of  Duden  (in  Mo.  Hist.  Review,  XVI  (1922),  pp.  522-550). 
4 7-  •  (1  ranslator).  Gottfried  Duden’s  “Report,”  1824—1827.  Bericht  ueber  eine 

Reise  nach  den  Westlichen  Staaten  Nord  Amerikas  (1829)  (in  Mo 
Hist.  Review,  XII,  1-21 ;  81-89;  163-179;  258-270;  XIII,  44-56;  157- 
181 ;  251-281. 

48.  Belknap,  Jeremy.  The  History  of  New  Hampshire  (3  vols.,  Boston,  1792). 

49.  Belknap  Papers  (in  Mass.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  5th  Series,  II  and  III). 

50.  Bell,  Charles.  History  of  Chester,  New  Hampshire  (in  N.  H.  Hist.  Soc  Collec- 

tions,  VI,  343-413). 

51.  Benton,  Elbert  Jay.  The  Wabash  Trade  Route  in  the  Development  of  the  Old 

Northwest  (in  I.  H.  U.  Studies  in  Historical  and  Political  Science, 
XXI  (1903),  Nos.  1-2. 

52.  Berkeley,  George.  Life  and  Letters  (Edited  by  A.  C.  Fraser,  Oxford,  1871). 

53-  Bidwell,  Percy  Wells.  The  Agricultural  Revolution  in  New  England  (in  Am. 

Hist.  Review,  XXVI  (1920-21),  pp.  683-702). 

54-  - •  Population  Growth  in  Southern  New  England,  1810-1860  (in  Am.  Statis¬ 

tical  Assn.  Quarterly  Publications,  XV  (1916-17),  New  Series  No. 
120,  pp.  813-839). 

55-  •  Rural  Economy  in  New  England  at  the  Beginning  of  Nineteenth  Century 

(in  Conn.  Academy  of  Arts  and  Sciences,  Transactions,  XX  (1916), 

.  „  PP-  241-399). 

56.  Birkbeck,  Morris.  Letters  from  Illinois  (London,  1818). 

57-  - -  Notes  on  a  Journey  in  America  from  the  Coast  of  Virginia  to  the  Terri¬ 

tory  of  Illinois  (Dublin,  1818). 

58.  Bliss,  George.  Address  (containing  Sketches  in  Early  History  of  Springfield, 

Mass.,  Springfield,  1828). 

59.  Blois,  John  T.  Gazetteer  of  Michigan  (Detroit,  1838). 

60.  Boardman,  Samuel  L.  Agricultural  Bibliography  of  Maine  (in  Maine  Dept,  of 

Agric.  35th  Annual  Report  (1892)). 

6i-  - -  The  Climate,  Soil,  Physical  Resources,  and  Agricultural  Capabilities  of  the 

State  of  Maine  (in  U.  S.  Dept,  of  Agric.  Miscellaneous  Special  Report 
No.  4,  Washington,  1884). 

62.  Bolton,  Charles  K.  Brookline ,  Massachusetts  (Brookline,  1897). 

63.  Bolton,  Ethel  S.  Shirley  Uplands  and  Intervales  (Boston,  1914). 

64.  Bond,  Phineas.  Letters  (1787-1794)  (in  Am.  Hist.  Assn.  Annual  Reports,  1896, 

,  _  I,  PP-  513-659;  1897,  PP-  454-568). 

65.  Bonham,  Lazarus  N.  American  Live  Stock  (in  Depew,  One  Hundred  Years  of 

American  Commerce,  I,  220-230). 

66.  Bordley,  John  Beale.  Essays  and  Notes  on  Husbandry  and  Rural  Affairs  (2d 

ed.,  Philadelphia,  1801). 

67.  Boston,  Registry  Department.  Records  Relating  to  the  Early  History  of  Boston 

(40  vols.,  1876-1909). 

68.  Boston  Board  of  Trade.  Annual  Reports  (1855-1876). 

69.  Bouton,  Nathaniel.  History  of  Concord,  New  Hampshire  (Concord,  1856). 

70.  Bowler,  Metcalf.  Treatise  on  Agriculture  and  Practical  Husbandry  (Providence, 

1786). 

71.  Bowman,  Isaiah.  Forest  Physiography  (N.  Y.,  1911). 


476 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


72. 

73- 

74- 

75- 
76. 

77- 

78. 

79- 

80. 

81. 

82. 

83. 

84. 

85. 

86. 

87. 

88. 

89. 

90. 

91. 

92. 

93. 

94. 

95. 

96. 

97. 

98. 

99. 

100. 

101. 

102. 

103. 

104. 

105. 

106. 

107. 

108. 

109. 

no. 

111. 

1 12. 


Bradford,  William.  History  of  Plymouth  Plantation  (edited  by  W.  T.  Davis, 

New  York,  1908).  .  ..  . 

Bradley,  Dan.  Soil  and  Agriculture  of  Onondaiga  County  (in  N.  Y.  Ba.  Agric. 

Memoirs,  III  (1826),  pp.  86-95).  .  ,  . 

Bradbury,  John.  Travels  in  the  Interior  of  America  (1809-1811)  (in  1  hwaites, 
Early  Western  Travels,  V,  42-309).  #  . 

Brigham,  Albert  Perry.  Geographic  Influences  in  American  History  (Boston, 

Brissott  de  Warville,  J.  P.  New  Travels  in  the  United  States  of  America,  1788 
(English  trans.  Dublin,  1792).  A  Q  Q 

Brookline,  Massachusetts.  Muddy  River  and  Brookline  Records,  1034-1030 

Brown,  Rev!"  Clark.  op 0 graphical  Description  of  Catskill  in  the  State  of  New 
York  (in  Mass.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  1st  Series,  IX  (1804),  pp. 

111-120.  , 

_  Topographical  Description  of  Newtown  ( Tioga  County)  New  1  ork  (in 

Mass.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  1st  Series,  IX  (1804),  pp.  120-126). 
Brown,  John  M.  Brief  Sketch  of  the  County  of  Schoharie  ( N .  P.),  1823. 

Buck,  Solon  Justus.  Illinois  in  1818  (Springfield,  Ill.,  1917). 

_  Travel  and  Description,  1765-1865  (in  Illinois  Hist.  Soc.  Collections ,  IX). 

Buck,  William  J.  History  of  Buck’s  County,  Pennsylvania  (Willow  Grove, 

Penn.,  1835).  ,  .  ,  T  j 

Buckingham,  J.  S.  The  Slave  States  of  America  (2  vols.,  London,  1842). 

Budd,  Thomas.  Good  Order  Established  in  Pennsylvania  and  New  Jersey,  1685 
(Shepard  ed.,  Cleveland,  1902). 

Buel,  Jesse.  The  Farmer’s  Companion  (Boston,  1839). 

Buffalo  Board  of  Trade.  Annual  Reports  (1869-1874). 

Burke,  Edmund.  European  Settlements  in  America  (2d  ed.,  London,  1758). 
Burkett,  C.  W.  History  of  Ohio  Agriculture  (Concord,  N.  H.,  1900). 

Burnaby  Andrew.  Travels  through  the  Middle  Settlements  of  North  America, 
1759-176 0  (reprinted  from  3d  ed.,  of  1798,  N.  Y.,  1904). 

Burnham,  C.  G.  Early  Traffic  on  the  Connecticut  River  (in  New  England  Maga¬ 
zine,  New  Series,  XXIII  (1900),  pp.  131-149). 

Burt,  Henry  M.  First  Century  of  the  History  of  Springfield  (Mass.) ,  (2  vols., 
Springfield,  1898).  .  .  . 

Bushnell,  Horace.  Work  and  Play  or  Literary  Varieties,  (N.  Y.,  1864). 

Caird,  James.  Prairie  Farming  in  America  (N.  Y.,  1859)-  . 

Calendar  of  State  Papers,  Colonial  Series.  See  Great  Britain. 

California  State  Agricultural  Society.  Transactions  (1858-1905) 

Callender,  Guy  Stevens.  Selections  from  the  Economic  History  of  the  United 
’  States,  1765-1860  (N.  Y.,  1909).  . 

Campbell,  Douglas.  The  Puritan  in  Holland,  England  and  America  (2  vols.,  N. 
Y.  1892). 

Campbell,  Patrick.  Travels  in  North  America,  1791-1792  (Edinburgh,  1793)- 
Carey,  H.  C.  Principles  of  Social  Science  (2  vols.,  Philadelphia,  1858-60). 
Carpenter  and  Morehouse  (Editors  and  Publishers).  History  of  Amherst,  Massa¬ 
chusetts  (Amherst,  1896).  < 

Carrier  Lyman  and  Katherine  S.  Bort.  History  of  Kentucky  Bluegrass  and 
White  Clover  in  the  United  States  (in  American  Society  of  Agronomy, 
Journal,  VIII  (1916),  pp.  256-266).  . 

Carrier,  Lyman.  Beginnings  of  Agriculture  in  America  (N.  Y.,  1923). 

Carter,  James  G.  Geography  of  New  Hampshire  (Boston,  1831). 

Carver,  T.  N.  Historical  Sketch  of  American  Agriculture  (in  Bailey,  Cyclopedia  ot 
American  Agriculture,  IV,  39-70). . 

Cary,  M.  and  J.  Bioren.  Laws  of  Pennsylvania  (6  vols.,  Philadelphia,  1803). 
Chamberlain,  Mellen.  Documentary  History  of  Chelsea,  Massachusetts  (2  vols., 
Boston,  1908). 

Channing,  Edward.  A  History  of  the  United  States  (5  vols.,  N.  Y.,  1905—21). 

_  The  Narragansett  Planters  (in  J.  H.  U.  Studies  in  Hist,  and  Pol.  Science, 

IV  (1886),  No.  3)- 

- .  Hart,  A.  B.,  and  F.  J.  Turner.  Guide  to  the  Study  and  Reading  of  Amer¬ 
ican  History  (Rev.  ed.,  Boston,  1912). 

Charlestown  (Mass.),  Early  Records.  (In  Young’s  Chronicles  of  Massachu¬ 
setts,  pp.  371-387)- 

Chase,  Benjamin.  History  of  Old  Chester  (N.  H.)  (Auburn,  N.  H.,  1869). 


ALPHABETICAL  INDEX  OF  AUTHORS 


477 


1 13.  Chastellux,  Francois  Jean.  Travels  in  North  America  in  the  Years  1780.  17S1 

and  1782  (N.  Y.,  1827). 

1 14.  Cheney,  Edward  P.  Manor  of  East  Greenwich  (in  Am.  Hist.  Review,  XI  1905- 

06,  pp.  29-35). 

1 1 5-  Chicago  Board  of  Trade.  Annual  Reports  (1858-1921). 

1 16.  Cincinnati  Chamber  of  Commerce.  Annual  Reports  (1850-1921). 

117.  Clap,  Roger.  Memoirs  (in  Young’s  Chronicles  of  Massachusetts,  343-368). 

115.  Clark,  Joseph  S.  Historical  Sketch  of  Sturbridge,  Massachusetts,  (Brookfield, 

1838). 

1 19.  Clark,  J.  V.  H.  Onondaga  (2  vols.,  N.  Y.,  1849). 

120.  Clark,  Victor  S.  History  of  Manufactures  in  the  United  States,  1607-1860  (Car¬ 

negie  Institution  of  Washington,  Publication  No.  215B,  Washington, 
J9i6). 

121.  Clarke,  Samuel.  Four  Chief est  Plantations  of  the  English  in  America  (London, 

1670). 

122.  Cluny,  Alexander.  The  American  Traveller  (London,  1769). 

123.  Cobbett,  William.  A  Years  Residence  in  the  United  States  of  America  (2d  ed., 

London,  1819). 

124.  Coburn,  Foster  Dwight.  Swine  Husbandry  (N.  Y.,  1897). 

125.  Cockrum,  William  M.  Pioneer  History  of  Indiana  (1907). 

126.  Coffin,  Charles.  The  Narragansett  Townships  (in  Maine  Hist.  Soc.  Collections, 

1st  Series,  II,  131-150). 

127.  Coffin,  Paul.  Journals  (in  Maine  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  1st  Series,  IV,  239-385). 

128.  Colli nson ,  Read.  Abridgement  of  the  Laws  of  Pennsylvania  (2  vols.,  Philadel¬ 

phia,  1801). 

129.  Colman,  Henry.  Agricultural  Addresses  at  Norwich,  New  Haven  and  Hartford, 

Connecticut,  at  the  County  Cattle  Shows  in  the  Year  1840  (Boston,’ 
1840). 

130.  Colonial  Society  of  Massachusetts.  Publications  (22  vols.,  1894-1920). 

131.  Journal  of  Judah  Colt  (1789-1808)  (in  Buffalo  Hist.  Soc.,  Publications,  VII, 

(1904),  pp.  331-359). 

132.  Commerce  of  Rhode  Island  (1725-1800)  (in  Mass.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  7th 

Series,  IX-X. 

133.  Congressional  Globe  (46  vols.,  Washington,  1834-1873). 

134.  Connecticut.  Public  Records  (15  vols.,  Hartford,  1850-1890). 

!35- - •  Resolves  and  Private  Laws,  1789-1836  (2  vols.,  Hartford,  1837). 

136.  Connecticut  Historical  Society.  Collections  (26  vols.,  Hartford,  1860-1916). 

137.  Connecticut  State  Agricultural  Society.  Transactions,  1854-1859  (Hartford 

1855-1859). 

138.  Conner,  John  B.  Indiana  Agriculture  (Indianapolis,  1893). 

139.  Connor,  L.  G.  Brief  Llistory  of  the  Sheep  Industry  in  the  United  States  (in  Am. 

Hist.  Assn.  Annual  Report,  1918,  pp.  89-198). 

140.  Cooper,  I  homas.  Some  Information  Respecting  America  (London,  1794). 

141.  Cooper,  William.  Guide  in  the  Wilderness,  1810.  (Reprinted  Rochester,  N.  Y 

1897). 

142.  Cope,  Gilbert.  Historical  Sketch  of  Chester  County  Agriculture  (in  Penn.  Bd. 

Agric.  Annual  Report  1880,  pp.  208-225). 

143.  The  Country  Gentleman  (weekly,  Albany,  N.  Y.,  1853-  ). 

144.  Coxe,  Tench.  View  of  the  United  States  of  America  (London,  1794). 

145.  Crevecoeur,  J.  Hector  St.  John  de.  Letters  from  an  American  Farmer  (1782) 

(reprinted  in  Everyman’s  Library,  N.  Y.,  1916?). 

146.  The  Cultivator  (monthly,  Albany,  N.  Y.,  1834-1865 ;  First  edition,  published  as 

monthly  edition  of  The  Country  Gentleman,  1853-1865). 

147.  Cuming,  F.  Sketches  of  a  Tour  to  the  Western  Country  1807-1809  (in  Thwaites, 

Early  Western  Travels,  IV). 

148.  Cutler,  Manasseh.  Description  of  the  Soil  etc.,  of  Ohio  1788.  (Tnans.  of  a 

French  edition,  reprinted  in  Ohio  State  Arch,  and  Hist.  Soc.  Publica¬ 
tions,  III  (1891),  pp.  82-108). 

149.  Cutler,  V  .  P.  and  J.  P.  (editors).  Life,  Journals  and  Correspondence  of  Rev. 

Manasseh  Cutler,  L.L.D.  (2  vols.,  Cincinnati,  1888). 

150.  Dabney,  John.  An  Address  to  Farmers  (Salem,  Mass.,  1796). 

151.  Dally,  Joseph.  Woodbridge  {Lew  Jersey )  and  Vicinity  (New  Brunswick  N  J, 

1873). 

152.  Danckaerts.  See  Dankers,  Jaspar  and  Peter  Sluyter. 

153.  Dankers,  Jaspar,  and  Peter  Sluyter.  Journal  of  a  Voyage  to  New  York,  1679- 

1680  (in  Long  Island  Hist.  Soc.  Memoirs,  I,  1-428). 


478 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


154.  Davidson,  J.  Bm  and  L.  W.  Chase.  Farm  Machinery  and  Farm  Motors  (N.  Y., 

1909). 

155.  Davis,  Andrew  MacFarland.  Barberry  Bushes  and  Wheat  (in  Col.  Soc.  Mass. 

Publications,  XI  (1907),  pp.  73- 95). 

156.  Davis,  Charles  Henry  Stanley.  History  of  Wallingford,  Meriden  and  Cheshire, 

Connecticut  (Meriden,  Conn.,  1870). 

157.  Davis,  William  Watts  Hart.  History  of  Bucks  County,  Pennsylvania  (Doyles- 

town,  1876). 

158.  Dean,  James.  Alphabetical  Atlas  or  Gazetteer  of  Vermont  (Montpelier,  Vt.,  1808). 

159.  Dean,  John  Ward  (editor).  Capt.  John  Mason  (Boston,  1887). 

160.  Deane,  Samuel.  Journal  (in  Smith’s  and  Deane’s  Journals,  Portland,  1849). 

161.  - .  The  New  England  Farmer  (1st  ed.,  Worcester,  179°  >  2d  ed.,  1797)  3d 

ed.,  1822). 

162.  De  Bow’s  Review  (J.  D.  B.  De  Bow,  editor)  (39  vols.,  New  Orleans,  1846-1870). 

163.  Dedham,  Massachusetts.  Early  Records  (1636-1706)  (5  vols.,  Dedham,  1886-99). 

164.  Pet,  a  ft,  Johan.  New  World  (Translated  in  Jameson’s  Narratives,  31-60). 

165.  Denton,  Daniel.  A  Brief  Description  of  New  York,  1670  (Furman  ed.,  N.  Y., 

1845). 

166.  De  Rasieres,  Isaak.  Letter  to  Samuel  Blomaert,  1628  (?)  (in  Jameson’s  Narra¬ 

tives,  99-115). 

167.  Description  of  the  Settlement  of  the  Genesee  Country  (i792)  (in  O’ Calla¬ 

ghan’s  Documentary  History  of  New  York,  II,  1129-1168). 

168.  Description  of  the  Towne  of  Mannadens  (1661)  (in  Jameson’s  Narratives, 

419-424). 

169.  De  Voe,  Thomas  F.  The  Market  Book  (N.  Y.,  1862). 

170.  De  Vries,  David  Pietersz.  Korte  Historiael  Ende  Journaels  Aenteyckeninge 

(1655)  (in  Jameson’s  Narratives,  183-234,  and  Myers’s  Narratives, 
1-29). 

171.  Dewitt,  Benjamin.  A  Sketch  of  the  Turnpike  Roads  in  the  State  of  New  York 

(in  N.  Y.  Soc.  for  Promoting  the  Useful  Arts,  Transactions,  II, 

190-204). 

172.  Dickinson,  Rodolphus.  Description  of  Deerfield  (Mass.)  (Deerfield,  1817). 

173.  - •  Geographical  and  Statistical  View  of  Massachusetts  (Greenfield,  Mass., 

1813). 

174.  Documents  Relating  to  the  Colonial  History  of  New  Jersey  (30  vols., 

Newark,  N.  J.,  1880-1918). 

175.  Doddridge,  Joseph.  Notes  on  the  ....  Western  Parts  of  Virginia  and  Penn¬ 

sylvania,  1763-1783  (in  Kercheval,  History  of  the  Valley  of  Virginia, 
2d  ed.,  Woodstock,  1850,  pp.  164-263). 

176.  Donaldson,  Thomas  Corwin.  The  Public  Domain  (Washington,  1884). 

177.  Dorchester  (Mass.).  Town  Records  (in  Boston  Record  Commissioners,  4th 

Report,  1880). 

178.  Dorr,  Henry  C.  The  Narragansetts  (in  R.  I.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  VII,  1 37-237). 

179.  - •  The  Planting  of  Rhode  Island  (in  R.  I.  Hist.  Tracts,  No.  15,  Providence, 

!882). 

180.  — * - .  The  Proprietors  of  Providence  (in  R.  I.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  IX  (1897)). 

181.  Douglass,  William,  M.D.  British  Settlements  in  North  America  (2  vols.,  2d 

ed.,  Boston,  1749). 

182.  Draper,  James.  History  of  Spencer,  Massachusetts  (2d  ed.,  Worcester,  i860).  ^ 

183.  Drown,  William  &  Solomon.  Compendium  of  Agriculture,  or  the  Farmer’s 

Guide  (Providence,  1824). 

184.  Duden’s  Report — See  Bek,  'William  G. 

185.  Dudley,  Paul.  An  Account  of  ...  .  making  Sugar  from  the  Juice  of <  the 

Maple  Trees  (in  Royal  Society  of  London,  Philosophical  Transactions, 
XXXI  (1720),  pp.  27-28). 

186.  Dudley,  Thomas.  Letter  to  Lady  Bridget,  Countess  of  Lincoln,  1630. 

187.  Dunham,  D.  M.  The  History  of  Agricultural  Implements  (in  18th  Annual  Re¬ 

port,  Maine  Bd.  Agric.,  1873,  pp.  363-371). 

188.  Dwight,  Theodore,  jr.  History  of  Connecticut  (N.  Y.,  1841). 

189.  Dwight,  Rev.  Timothy.  Statistical  Account  of  New  Haven  (New  Haven,  1811). 

190.  - .  Travels  in  New  England  and  New  York  (4  vols.,  New  Haven,  1821 ;  Eng. 

ed.,  London,  1823). 

191.  Earle,  Alice  Morse.  Home  Life  in  Colonial  Days  (N.  Y.,  1898). 

192.  Eaton,  Amos.  Geological  and  Agricultural  Survey  of  Rensselaer  County  (New 

York )  (in  N.  Y.  Bd.  Agric.  Memoirs,  ll  1823). 

193.  Eaton,  Peter.  Address  before  Essex  Agricultural  Society  (1822)  (Salem,  Mass., 

1823). 


ALPHABETICAL  INDEX  OF  AUTHORS 


479 


194.  Eby,  Simon  P.  Agriculture  (in  Ellis  and  Evans,  History  of  Lancaster  County, 

Pennsylvania,  Philadelphia,  1883). 

195.  Edwards,  Bryan.  History  of  the  British  Colonies  in  the  West  Indies  (2d  ed., 

2  vols.,  London,  1794;  3d  ed.,  1801). 

196.  Eggleston,  Edward.  The  Colonists  at  Home  (in  Century  Magazine,  XXIX  (1884- 

1885),  pp.  873-892). 

]97-  - .  Husbandry  in  Colony  Times  (Ibid.,  XXVII  (1883-1884),  pp.  431-449). 

108.  - .  Social  Conditions  in  the  Colonies  (Ibid.,  XXVIII  (1884),  PP-  848-871). 

*99-  - •  Social  Life  in  the  Colonies  (Ibid.,  XXX  (1885),  pp.  387-407). 

200.  Egleston,  Melville.  The  Land  System  of  the  New  England  Colonies  (in  J.  H . 

U.  Studies  in  Hist,  and  Pol.  Science,  IV,  Nos.  11-12  (1886),  pp.  545- 
600). 

201.  Eliot,  Jared.  Essays  on  Field  Husbandry  in  New  England  (Boston,  1760). 

202.  Elliott,  Richard  Smith.  Notes  Taken  in  Sixty  Years  (St.  Louis,  1883). 

203.  Ellis,  Franklin,  and  Samuel  Evans.  History  of  Lancaster  County,  Pennsyl¬ 

vania.  (Philadelphia,  1883). 

204.  Ellsworth,  Henry  W.  Valley  of  the  Upper  Wabash,  Indiana  (N.  Y.,  1838). 

205.  Elting,  Irving.  Dutch  Village  Communities  on  the  Hudson  River  (in  J.  H.  U. 

Studies  in  Hist,  and  Pol.  Science,  IV,  No.  1  (1886),  pp.  1-68). 

206.  Esarey,  Logan.  History  of  Indiana  from  its  Exploration  to  1850  (2d  ed.,  Indian¬ 

apolis,  1918). 

207.  Essex  County,  Massachusetts.  Records  and  Files  of  the  Quarterly  Courts, 

I  (1636-1656)  (Salem,  1911). 

208.  Essex  Institute  (Salem,  Mass.),  Historical  Collections  (40  vols.,  1859-1904). 

209.  Evans,  Estwick.  Pedestrious  Tour  (1818)  (in  Thwaites,  Early  Western  Travels, 

VIII,  90-364). 

210.  Farmer,  John.  Historical  Sketch  of  Amherst,  New  Hampshire  (in  N.  H.  Hist. 

Soc.  Collections,  IV,  79-128). 

21 1.  Farmer,  John,  and  Moore,  Jacob  B.  Collections — relating  to  New  Hampshire 

(3  vols.,  1822-1824). 

212.  - .  - ,  Gazetteer  of  New  Hampshire  (Concord,  1823). 

213.  Faust,  Albert  B.  German  Element  in  the  United  States  (2  vols.,  N.  Y.,  1909). 

214.  Faux,  W.  Memorable  Days  in  America  (in  Thwaites,  Early  Western  Travels, 

XI  and  XII,  1-138,  London,  1823). 

215.  Fearon,  H.  B.  Sketches  of  America  (London,  1818). 

216.  Felt,  Joseph  B.  History  of  Ipswich,  Essex,  and  Hamilton  (Mass.)  (Cambridge, 

1834). 

2I7-  - * — •  Population  of  Massachusetts  (in  Am.  Statistical  Assn.  Collections,  I, 

121-216)  (Boston,  1845). 

218.  - ■.  Statistics  of  Towns  in  Massachusetts  (in  Am.  Statistical  Assn.  Collec¬ 

tions,  I,  9-99). 

219.  Fernow,  Berthold.  Few  Netherland,  or  the  Dutch  in  North  America  (in  Winsor, 

History  of  America,  IV,  395-409). 

220.  Ferree,  Barr.  Pennsylvania:  a  Primer  (N.  Y.,  1904). 

221.  Field,  David  Dudley.  A  History  of  the  County  of  Berkshire,  Massachusetts 

(Pittsfield,  Mass.,  1829). 

222.  Filson,  John.  Discovery,  Settlement,  and  Present  State  of  Kentucky  (1784) 

(in  Imlay,  Western  Territory,  3d  ed.,  306-337). 

223-  - •  Statistical  Account  of  the  County  of  Middlesex  in  Connecticut  (Middle- 

town,  Conn.,  1819). 

224.  Fiske,  John.  The  Beginnings  of  New  England  (Boston,  1899). 

225.  Fitch,  Asa.  The  Hessian  Fly  (in  N.  Y.  State  Agric.  Soc.  Transactions  (1846), 

PP,  316-373). 

226.  Plagg,  Charles.  Guide  to  Massachusetts  Local  History  (Salem,  Mass.,  1907). 

227.  Flagg,  W.  C.  Agriculture  of  Illinois  (1683-1876)  (in  Ill.  Dept.  Agric.,’  Trans¬ 

actions,  XIII  (1875)  ). 

228.  Flint,  Charles  L.  A  Hundred  Years’  Progress  of  American  Agriculture  (in 

igth  Annual  Report,  Maine  Bd.  Agric.  (1874),  pp.  105-153). 

229.  Flint,  Charles  L.  Progress  in  Agriculture  (in  Kettell,  Eighty  Years’  Progress 

I,  19-102). 

230.  Flint,  Rev.  Jacob.  History  and  Description  of  C ohasset,  Norfolk  County,  Massa¬ 

chusetts  (1822)  (in  Mass.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  3d  Series,  II,  89- 

I09). 

231.  I  lint,  James.  Letters  from  /. Imerica  (1818—1820)  (in  T-hwaites,  Early  Western 

Travels,  IX). 

232.  Flint,  Martha  B.  Early  Long  Island  (N.  Y.,  1896). 


480 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


233.  Flint,  Timothy.  A  Condensed  Geography  and  History  of  the  W estern  States , 

or  the  Mississippi  Valley  (2  vols.,  Cincinnati,  1828). 

234.  - •  Recollections  of  the  Last  Ten  Years  (Boston,  1826). 

233.  Flower  George.  History  of  the  English  Settlement  in  Edwards  County  fill.) 

(1817-1849)  (in  Chicago  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  l  (1882)  ). 

236.  Flower.  Richard.  Letters  from  Lexington  and  the  Illinois  1819.  Letters  from 

the  Illinois  1820, 1821  (in  Thwaites,  Early  Western  Travels ,  X,  89-169). 

237.  Folger,  Walter  jr.  Topographical  Description  of  A  antucket  (in  Mass.  Hist. 

Soc.  Collections,  1st  Series,  III,  153— ^tSS)  •  , 

238.  Force,  Peter.  Tracts  ....  Relating  to  the  Origin,  Settlement,  and  Progress  of 

the  Colonies  in  North  America  (4  vols.,  Washington,  1846).  .  e 
230.  Ford,  A.  C.  Colonial  Precedents  of  our  National  Land  System  as  it  Existed  m 

1800  (Wis.  Univ.  Bulletin,  History  Series,  II,  No.  2  (1910),  Whole 
No.  352). 

240.  Ford,  Governor  Thomas.  History  of  Illinois  (1818-1847)  (Chicago,  1854). 

241.  Foster,  A.  and  P.  P.  Woodbury.  Topographical  Sketch  of  Bedford,  New  Hamp¬ 

shire  (in  N.  H.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections ,  I,  288-296). 

242.  Fowler,  Frederick  H.  Early  Agricultural  Education  in  Massachusetts  (in  54th 

Annual  Report,  Mass.  State  Bd.  Agriculture  (1906),  pp.  33I~392). 

243.  Flower,  John.  Journal  of  a  Tour  in  New  York  (London,  1831).  , 

244.  Frame,  Richard.  A  Short  Description  of  Pennsylvania  (1692)  (in  Myers  s  Aarra- 

tives,  295-305).  ,  .  o  <  o  \ 

245.  Franklin,  Benjamin.  Works  (Sparks,  ed.,  10  vols.,  1836-1840). 

246.  Freeman,  Charles.  An  Account  of  Limerick  (in  Maine  Hist.  Soc.  Collections, 

1st  Series,  I,  245-253). 

247.  French,  J.  H,.  Gazetteer  of  the  State  of  New  York  (8th  ed.,  N.  \ .,  i860). 

248.  Fry,  W.  H.  New  Hampshire  as  a  Royal  Province  (in  Columbia  Univ.  Studies 

in  History,  Economics  and  Public  Law,  XXIX  (1908),  No.  2. 

240.  Fuller,  George.  Economic  and  Social  Beginnings  of  Michigan,  1805-1837  (Lans- 

250.  Furman,  Gabriel.  Antiquities  of  Long  Island  (ed.,  by  Frank  Moore,  N.  Y., 

251.  Futhey,  J. 1  IP  and  Gilbert  Cope.  History  of  Chester  County,  Pennsylvania 

(Philadelphia,  1881).  .  . 

252.  Gabriel,  Ralph  Henry.  The  Evolution  of  Long  Island  (in  Yale  Hist.  Publica¬ 

tions,  Miscellany,  IX,  New  Haven,  1921).  . 

253.  Gardiner,  John  Lyon.  Notes  on  East  Hampton  (L.  I.)  (1798)  (in  N.  Y.  Hist. 

Soc.  Collections,  Publication  Fund  Series,  II,  225-271).. 

254.  Gardiner,  Robert  H.  History  of  the  Kennebec  Purchase  (in  Maine  Hist.  Soc. 

Collections,  1st  Series,  II,  269-294). 

255.  The  Genessee  Farmer  (weekly,  Rochester,  N.  Y.,  1831-39). 

256.  George,  N.  J.  T.  Gazetteer  of  Vermont  (Haverhill  (N.  H.),  1823). 

257.  Gephart,  William  P.  Transportation  and  Industrial  Development  in  the  Middle 

West  (in  Columbia  Univ.  Studies  in  History,  Economics  and  Pub¬ 
lic  Law,  XXXIV,  No.  1,  N.  Y.,  1909). 

258.  Gerhard,  Fred.  Illinois  as  It  Is  (Chicago  and  Philadelphia,  1857). 

259.  Gilbert,  Frank.  Jethro  Wood  (Chicago,.  1882). 

260.  Gist,  Christopher.  Journal  (1750)  (in  Filson  Club  Publications ,  No.  13). 

261.  Gleanings  from  the  Most  Celebrated  Book  on  Husbandry  (Philadelphia,  30, 

1803). 

262.  Goodale,  George  Lincoln.  New  England  Plants  Seen  by  the  Earliest  Colonists 

(in  Col.  Soc.  of  Mass.,  Publications,  III  (1895-97),  189-194).  . 

263.  Goodwin,  F.  P.  Building  a  Commercial  System  (in  Ohio  State  Arch.  &  Hist.  Soc. 

Quarterly,  XVI  (1907),  316-339)* 

264.  Gordon,  Thomas  F.  History  of  New  Jersey  (Trenton,  1834). 

265.  - .  Gazetteer  of  the  State  of  Pennsylvania  (Philadelphia,  1832). 

26 6.  - .  Gazetteer  of  the  State  of  New  York  (Philadelphia,  1836). 

267.  Goss,  E.  H.  The  Hungry  Pilgrims  (in  Magazine  of  American  History,  XIII 

(1885),  PP.  477-48o). 

268.  Graham,  J.  A.  Descriptive  Sketch  of  ...  .  Vermont  (London,  1797)- 

269.  Graves,  Thomas.  Letter  sent  from  New  England  (1629)  (in  Young’s  Chronicles, 

264-267). 

270.  Great  Britain.  Public  Record  Office,  Calendar  of  State  Papers,  Colonial  Series 

(23  vols.,  London,  1860-1916). 

271.  Green,  John  Richard.  Short  History  of  the  English  People  (2  vols.,  N.  \ 

1898). 


ALPHABETICAL  INDEX  OF  AUTHORS  481 


272.  Green,  Samuel  A.  Early  Land  Grants  of  Groton,  Massachusetts  (Groton,  1870). 
273-  - •  Historical  Address  (Groton,  1876). 

274.  .  s\n  Historical  Sketch  of  Groton,  Massachusetts  (Groton,  1894). 

275-  - .  Groton  Historical  Series  (4  vols.,  Groton,  1887-1899). 

276.  .  Scotch  Irish  in  America  (in  Am.  Antiq.  Soc.  Proceedings,  New  Series,  X 

_  (1895),  pp.  32-70). 

-77-  Greenleaf,  Moses.  Statistical  I  iew  of  the  District  of  Maine  (Boston,  1816). 

278.  - .  Survey  of  the  State  of  Maine  (Portland,  1829). 

279.  Greenleaf,  1  homas.  Geographical  Gazetteer  of  Towns  in  Massachusetts  (Boston 

o  ^  U84). 

280.  Greeno,  Follet  L.  (ed.).  Obed  Hussey  (Rochester,  N.  Y.,  1912). 

281.  Griffin,  A.  P.  C.  Bibliography  of  American  Historical  Societies  (in  American 

Hist.  Assn.  Annual  Report,  II  (1905),  2d  ed.,  Washington,  1907). 

282-  - •  Bibliography  of  Hist.  Publications  of  the  New  England  States  (in  Col. 

Soc.  of  Mass.  Publications,  III  (1895-97),  PP-  94-139). 

283.  Hall,  Frederick.  Statistical  Account  of  the  Town  of  Middlebury  ....  Ver¬ 

mont  (1820)  (in  Mass.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  2d  Series,  IX,  123-158). 

284.  Hall,  James.  Notes  on  the  Western  States  (Philadelphia,  1838). 

285.  - .  Statistics  of  the  West  (Cincinnati,  1836). 

286.  Hansen,  AiVin  H.  Wholesale  Prices  in  the  United  States,  1801-1840  (in  Am. 

Statistical  Assn.  Quarterly  Publications,  XIV  (1914-15),  pp.  804-812). 

287.  Hardie,  James.  Description  of  th&  City  of  New  York  (N.  Y.,  1827). 

288.  Harlow,  Ralph  V.  Economic  Conditions  in  Massachusetts  during  the  American 

Revolution  (in  Publications,  Col.  Soc.  Mass.,  XX  (1917-19),  pp. 
163-190). 

289.  Harriott,  John.  Struggles  through  Life  (2  vols.,  London,  1808). 

290.  Harris,  Thaddeus  Mason.  Journal  of  a  Tour  into  the  Territory  Northwest  of 

the  Allegheny  Mountains  ( 1803 )  (Boston,  1805). 

291.  Hasse,  Adelaide  R.  Index  of  Economic  Material  in  Documents  of  the  States  of 

the  United  States,  (1789— 1904) ,  Illinois,  Maine,  Massachusetts,  New 
Hampshire,  New  Jersey,  New  York,  Ohio,  Pennsylvania,  Rhode  Island, 
Vermont  (Washington,  1907-1921). 

292.  Hawley,  Zerah.  Tour  and  Residence  in  Western  Reserve  (1822). 

293.  Hawthorne,  Nathaniel.  American  Note  Books  (nth  ed.,  1887/  in  Complete 

Works,  Riverside  ed.,  Vol.  IX,  Boston,  1886-89). 

294*  Hayes,  Lyman  S.  Navigation  of  the  Connecticut  River  (in  Vermont  Hist.  Soc. 

Proceedings  (1915-1916),  pp.  51-86). 

295.  Hayward,  John.  Gazetteer  of  Maine  (1843). 

296.  - .  Gazetteer  of  Massachusetts  (Rev.  ed.,  Boston,  1849). 

297*  - •  Gazetteer  of  New  Hampshire  (Boston,  1849). 

298.  Hayward,  William  Welles.  History  of  Hancock,  New  Hampshire  (1764-1889) 

(Lowell,  Mass.,  1889). 

299.  Hazard,  Caroline.  College  Tom  (Boston,  1893). 

300.  Hazard,  Samuel.  Annals  of  Pennsylvania  1609-1682  (Philadelphia,  1850). 

30i-  -  (editor).  Register  of  Pennsylvania  (weekly)  (16  vols.,  1828-1835). 

302.  Hazen,  Henry  A.  History  of  Billerica,  Mass.  (Boston,  1883). 

303.  Hedges,  Henry  P.  Development  of  Agriculture  in  Suffolk  County  (New  York ) 

(in  Bicentennial  History  of  Suffolk  County,  (1885))/ 

304.  Hempstead,  Joshua.  Diary  (1711-1758)  (in  New  London  County  Hist.  Soc. 

Collections,  I  (1901),  New  London  (Conn.),  1901). 

305.  Hibbard,  B.  H.  History  of  Agriculture  in  Dane  County,  Wisconsin  (Univ.  of  Wis. 

Bulletin  No.  101,  1904). 

306.  Higginson,  Francis.  Journal  (1629)  (in  Young’s  Chronicles  of  Mass.,  213-238). 

307.  - .  New  England’s  Plantation  (3d  ed.,  London,  1630,  reprinted  in  Young’s 

Chronicles  of  Mass.,  239-268). 

308.  Holmes,  G.  K.  Aboriginal  Agriculture — The  American  Indians  (in  Bailey’s 

Cyclopedia  of  American  Agriculture,  IV,  24-38). 

309.  - .  Progress  of  Agriculture  in  the  United  States  (U.  S.  Dept,  of  Agric. 

Yearbook,  1899,  pp.  307-334)  • 

310.  Hood,  John.  Index  of  Colonial  ami  State  Laws  of  New  Jersey  (1663-1877) 

(Trenton,  1877). 

311.  Hoskins,  Nathan.  History  of  the  State  of  Vermont  (Vergennes,  Vt.,  1831). 

312.  Hotchkin,  J.  H.  History  of  Western  New  York  (N.  Y.,  1848). 

313.  Howells,  William  C.  Recollections  of  Life  in  Ohio  (1830-1840)  (Cincinnati, 

1895). 

314.  Hubbard,  Mary  Ann.  Family  Memories  (1820-1909)  (Chicago,  1912). 

32 


482 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


Hubbard,  William.  General  History  of  Hew  England  (1680)  (in  Mass.  I  List. 
Soc.  Collections,  2d  Series,  V  and  VI). 

316.  Hulbert,  Archer  B.  Historic  Highways  of  America  (16  vols.,  1902-1905). 

317.  Hulme,  Thomas.  Journal  Made  During  a  Tour  in  the  Western  Countries  of 

America  (in  Thwaites,  Early  Western  Travels,  X,  19-84). 

318.  Hunt,  Thomas  F.  The  Cereals  in  America  (N.  Y.,  1904). 

3™.  Hutchins,  Thomas.  Topographical  Description  of  Virginia,  Pennsylvania,  Mary¬ 
land  and  North  Carolina  (in  Imiay,  Western  Territory,  3d  ed., 

320  Hutchinson,  ^Thomas  (editor).  Collection  of  Original  Papers  Relative  to  the 

History  of  the  Colony  of  the  Massachusetts  Bay  (2  vols.,  Boston, 

1769).  _  . 

321.  - .  History  of  the  Colony  of  Massachusetts  Bay  (3  vols.,  Boston,  1764,  1707). 

322'.  Illinois  State  Agricultural  Society.  Transactions  (biennial,  1853-1870). 

323.  Imlay,  Gilbert.  Topographical  Description  of  the  Western  Territory  of  North 

America  (3d  ed.,  London  (i797)  )• 

324.  Indiana  State  Board  of  Agriculture.  Annual  Reports  (1851-1910). 

325.  Indiana  University:  Extension  Section.  Readings  in  Indiana  History  (Pub¬ 

lished  by  the  University  1914)-  . 

326.  Ingle,  Edward.  Southern  Sidelights  (Library  of  Economics  and  Politics,  No. 

10,  1896). 

327.  Innes,  J.  H.  New  Amsterdam  and  Its  People  (N.  Y.,  1902). 

328.  Iowa  State  Agricultural  Society.  Annual  Reports  (1854-1899). 

329.  Jackson,  Charles  T.  Geological  and  Agricultural  Survey  of  Rhode  Island  (Provi¬ 

dence,  1839). 

330.  Jameson,  J.  Franklin.  Nantuck  and  Common  Lands  of  Easthampton  (in  Maga¬ 

zine  of  American  History,  IX  (1883),  pp.  225-239). 

331.  -  (editor).  Narratives  of  New  N etherland  (1609-1664)  (N.  Y.,  I9°9)- 

332.  Jefferson,  Thomas.  Description  of  a  Mould-board  of  the  Least  Resistance ,  and 

of  the  Easiest  and  Most  Certain  Construction  (in  American  Philo¬ 
sophical  Society,  Transactions,  IV  (i799)>  PP-  3I3~322)- 

333.  - .  Writings  (Library  ed.,  20  vols.,  Washington,  D.  C.,  1903-1904). 

334.  Jogues,  Father  Isaac.  Novum  Belgium  (1646)  (In  Jameson’s  Narratives,  25 7~ 

263) . 

335-  Johnson*  Amandus.  Swedish  Settlements  on  the  Delaware  (1638-1664)  (2  vols., 

Philadelphia,  1911). 

336.  Johnson,  C.  B.  (pseudonym  of  R.  H,.  Rose  q.  v.)  . 

337.  Johnson,  Edward.  Wonder  Working  Providence  of  Sions  Saviour  in  New  Eng¬ 

land  (1628-1651)  (J.  F.  Jameson,  ed.,  N.  Y.,  1910). 

338.  Johnson,  Emory  Richard,  et  al.  History  of  Domestic  and  Foreign  Commerce 

of  the  United  States  (Carnegie  Institution  of  Washington  Pub.,  No. 
215A,  2  vols.,  Washington,  1915).  . 

339-  Jones,  Charles.  The  Broom  Corn  Industry  in  the  Counties  of  Franklin  and 
Hampshire  (Mass.)  (in  Pocumtuck  Valley  Memorial  Assn.  Hist,  and 
Proceedings,  III,  105-m). 

340.  Jones,  John.  Letter  (1725)  (in  Myers’s  Narratives,  449-459). 

341.  Jones,  Samuel  and  Richard  Varick.  Laws  of  the  State  of  New  York  1778-1786 

(2  vols.,  N.  Y.,  1789). 

342.  Josselyn,  John.  Account  of  Two  Voyages  to  New  England  (in  Mass.  Hist.  Soc. 

Collections,  3d  Series,  III,  3ii~354)- 

343.  Judd,  Sylvester.  History  of  Hadley  (Mass.)  (New  ed.,  Springfield,  Mass.,  1905). 

344.  J uekgens,  Carl  H.  Movement  of  Wholesale  Prices  in  New  York  1825-1863  (in 

Am.  Statistical  Assn.  Quarterly  Publications,  XII  (1911-12),  pp.  544- 

557)  • 

345.  Kalm,  Per.  Travels  into  North  America  (1748-175°)  (Trans,  by  J.  R.  Forster, 

3  vols.,  Warrington  and  London,  1770-1771). 

346.  Keen,  Gregory  B.  New  Sweden,  or  the  Swedes  on  the  Delaware  (in  Winsor, 

America,  IV,  443-488). 

347.  Kelly,  John.  Historical  Sketch  of  Hampstead  (N.  H.)  (in  N.  H.  Hist.  Soc. 

Collections,  V  (1835),  PP-  I79~i99)- 

348.  Kendall,  Edward  Augustus.  Travels  Through  the  Northern  Parts  of  the 

United  States  (1807-1809)  (3  vols.,  N.  Y.,  1809). 

349.  Kettell,  Thomas  P.  (editor).  Eighty  Years'  Progress  of  the  United  States 

(2  vols.,  N.  Y.,  1861). 

350.  Kilbourn,  John.  Ohio  Gazetteer  (11  eds.,  1816-1833). 

351.  King,  I.  F.  The  Coming  and  Going  of  Ohio  Droving  (in  Ohio  State  Arch,  and 

Hist.  Soc.  Quarterly,  XVII  (1908),  pp.  247-253). 


ALPHABETICAL  INDEX  OF  AUTHORS  483 


352.  Kittery  Memorial  (1751)  (in  Maine  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  1st  Series,  IV,  199- 

205). 

353.  Klippart,  John  H.  The  Wheat  Plant  (N.  Y.,  i860). 

354.  Knight,  Madam.  Journals  (1704)  (Winship  ed.,  Boston,  1920). 

355.  Kuhns,  Oscar.  German  and  Swiss  Settlements  of  Colonial  Pennsylvania  (N. 

Y.,  1901). 

356.  Lambert,  John.  Travels  in  Lower  Canada  and  New  Hampshire  in  the  Years 

1806,  1807  &  1808  (London,  1810). 

357.  Lamson-Scribner,  Frank.  Economic  Grasses  (in  U.  S.  Dept,  of  Agric.,  Division 

of  Agrostology,  Bulletin,  No.  14). 

358.  Lanman,  James  H.  History  of  Michigan  (N.  Y.,  1839). 

359.  Larned,  Ellen  Douglas.  History  of  Windham  County,  Connecticut  (2  vols., 

Worcester,  Mass.,  1874). 

360.  La  Rochefoucauld-Liancourt.  Travels  through  the  United  States  of  North 

America  (2  vols.,  London,  1799). 

361.  Leaming,  Aaron  and  Jacob  Spicer.  Grants  and  Concessions  of  Nezv  Jersey, 

(1664-170 2)  (2d  ed..  Somerville,  N.  J.,  1881). 

362.  Lechford,  Thomas.  Note  Book  (in  Am.  Antiquarian  Soc.  Transactions,  VII 

(1885). 

363.  Lees,  John.  Journal  (1768)  (reprinted  N.  Y.,  1911). 

364.  Leonard,  Rev.  Levi  'W.  History  of  Dublin,  Nezo  Hampshire  (Boston,  1855). 

365.  Liberties  of  the  Massachusetts  Colonie  in  New  England  (in  Mass.  Hist. 

Soc.  Collections,  3d  Series,  VIII,  191-237). 

366.  Lincklaen,  Joh,n.  Journals  (N.  Y.,  1897). 

367.  Lippincott,  Isaac.  Pioneer  Industry  in  the  West  (in  Journal  of  Political  Economy, 

XVIII  (1910),  pp.  269-293). 

368.  Livingston,  Robert  R.  American  Agriculture  (in  Edinburgh  Encyclopedia,  1st 

Ani.  ed.,  18  vols.,  Philadelphia,  1832). 

369.  - .  Essay  on  Sheep  (N.  Y.,  1809). 

370.  Loddington,  William.  Plantation  Work  (London,  1682). 

371.  Lodge,  Henry  Cabot.  Short  History  of  the  English  Colonies  (N.  Y.,  1881). 

372.  Lodowick,  Charles.  New  York  in  1692  (in  N.  Y.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  2d 

Series,  I,  243). 

373.  Logan,  George.  Fourteen  Agricultural  Experiments  to  Ascertain  the  Best  Rotation 

of  Crops  (Philadelphia,  1797). 

374.  Long,  Moses.  Historical  Sketches  of  Warner,  New  Hampshire  (in  N.  H.  Hist. 

Soc.  Collections,  III,  179-206). 

375.  Lorain,  John.  Nature  and  Reason  Harmonized  in  the  Practice  of  Husbandry 

(Philadelphia,  1825). 

376.  Lord,  Eleanor  Louisa.  Industrial  Experiments  in  the  British  Colonies  of  North 

America  (in  J.  PI.  U.  Studies  in  Hist,  and  Pol.  Sci.,  Extra  vol. 
XVII  (1898). 

377.  Love,  Rev.  William  de  Loss.  Colonial  History  of  Hartford,  (Conn.)  (Hartford, 

^914)  • 

378.  - .  Nazngation  of  the  Connecticut  River  (in  Am.  Antiq.  Soc.  Proceedings, 

New  Series,  XV  (1902-3),  pp.  385-441). 

379.  Lyman,  Payson  W.  History  of  Easthampton  (Mass.)  (Northampton,  1866). 

380.  Macauley,  James.  Natural,  Statistical  and  Civil  History  of  the  State  of  New 

York  (3  vols.,  N.  Y.,  1829). 

381.  Maclear,  Anne  B.  Early  New  England  T owns  (in  Columbia  University  Studies 

in  Political  Science,  XXIX  (1908),  No.  1). 

382.  McMaster,  John  Bach.  History  of  the  People  of  the  United  States  (8  vols.,  N. 

Y.,  1885-1913). 

383.  Macsparran,  James.  America  Dissected  (1753)  (reprinted  in  Updike’s  Narragan- 

sett  Church,  III). 

384.  - .  Letter  Book  (1743-1751)  (Boston,  1899). 

385.  Macy,  Obed.  History  of  Nantucket  (Boston,  1835). 

386.  Macy,  Zacchaeus.  A  Short  Journal  of  the  First  Settlement  of  ...  .  Nan¬ 

tucket  (in  Mass.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  1st  Series,  III,  155-161). 

387.  Maine.  State  Board  of  Agriculture,  Annual  Reports,  1855-1901. 

388.  - .  State  Board  of  Agriculture,  Transactions  of  the  Agricultural  Societies 

(1850-1852,  Part  I  (1853). 

389.  - .  Report  of  the  State  Treasurer,  1843. 

390.  Maine  Farmer  (weekly)  (Winthrop,  Me.,  1833-1922). 

391.  Maine  Historical  Society.  Collections  (Series  1-3,  22  vols.,  Portland,  1831-1906). 

392.  Mainwaring,  Charles  W.  Digest  of  Early  Connecticut  Probate  Records,  Hart¬ 

ford  District  (3  vols.,  Hartford  1904). 


484  AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


393.  Marquis,  J.  C.  Changes  in  Fanning  in  an  Old  Community  (in  Bailey’s  Cyclopedia, 

IV,  pp.  97-101). 

394.  Marsh,  Charles  W.  Recollections  1837-1910  (Chicago,  1910). 

395.  Martin,  John  Hill.  Chester,  (Penn.),  and  its  Vicinity  (Philadelphia,  1877). 

396.  Martindale,  Joseph  C.  History  of  the  Townships  of  Byberry  and  Moreland  in 

Philadelphia  County  (Philadelphia,  1867). 

39 7.  Massachusetts  (Colony).  Probate  Court  ( Essex  County),  Probate  Records, 

1635-1681  (3  vols.,  Salem,  1916-1920). 

398.  - .  Acts  and  Resolves  of  the  Province  of  Massachusetts  Bay,  1692-1780  (21 

vols.,  Boston,  1869-1922). 

399.  - .  Records  of  the  Governor  and  Company  of  the  Massachusetts  Bay  in  New 

England  (1628-1686)  (5  vols.,  Boston  (1853-54). 

400.  Massachusetts  Board  of  Agriculture.  Annual  Reports  (1851-1917). 

401.  - .  Commissioner  for  the  Agricultural  Survey.  Agriculture  of  Massachusetts, 

1st  to  4th  Reports  (1837-1841)  (Boston,  1838-1841). 

402.  - .  Laws  of  Massachusetts  (1780-1800)  (2  vols.,  Boston,  1801). 

403.  - .  Legislative  Documents.  House  of  Representatives  Document  No.  <  12 

(1838);  Senate  Document  No.  77  (1838)  ;  House  of  Representatives 
Document  No.  40  (1839)  I  Senate  Document  No.  2  (1841). 

404.  - .  Returns  of  the  Agricultural  Societies  (1845-46). 

405.  - .  Statistics  of  Certain  Branches  of  Industry  (1837). 

405a.  - .  Transactions  of  the  Agricultural  So'deties  (1847-1852).  After  1852  the 

Transactions  are  found  in  the  Annual  Reports. 

406.  Massachusetts  Agricultural  Repository  and  Journae.  (10  vols.,  1798-1832). 

407.  Massachusetts  Historical  Society.  Collections  (74  vols.,  1794-1918). 

408.  Massachusetts  Society  for  Promoting  Agriculture.  Laws  and  Regulations 

(Boston,  1793). 

409.  Mathews,  A.  The  Topographical  Terms  “Interval”  and  “ Intervale ”  (in  Col. 

Soc.  Mass.  Publications,  ¥1(1899),  pp.  137-151). 

410.  Mathews,  Lois  Kimball.  The  Expansion  of  New  England  (Boston,  1909). 

41 1.  Maude,  John.  Visit  to  the  Falls  of  Niagara  (1800)  (London,  1826). 

412.  Maverick,  Samuel.  A  Brief e  Description  of  New  England  (1660)  (in  New  Eng¬ 

land  Historical  and  Genealogical  Register,  XXXIX,  1885,  pp.  33-48). 

413.  Mease,  James.  Geological  Account  of  the  United  States  (Philadelphia,  1807). 

414.  Mechanics’  Magazine  (9  vols.,  N.  Y.,  1833-37). 

415.  Megapolensis,  Johannes  jr.  A  Short  Account  of  the  Mohawk  Indians  (1644)  (in 

Jameson’s  Narratives,  165-180). 

416.  Melish,  John.  Travels  Through  the  United  States  of  America,  1806-1811  (2  vols., 

Philadelphia,  1815). 

417.  Merchants’  Magazine  and  Commercial  Review  (Freeman  Hunt,  ed.)  (monthly, 

N.  Y.,  1840-70). 

418.  Meyer,  Balthasar  Henry.  History  of  Transportation  in  the  United  States  before 

i860  (Washington,  1917)  (Carnegie  Institute  of  Washington,  Pub. 
No.  215  C). 

419.  Michaelius,  Jonas.  Letter  (1628)  in  Jameson’s  Narratives,  119-133). 

420.  Michaux,  Andre.  Journal  of  Travels  into  Kentucky  (1793-1796)  (in  Thwaites, 

Early  Western  Travels,  III,  25-104), 

421.  Michaux,  F.  A.  Travels  to  the  West  of  the  Allegheny  Mountains  (in  Thwaites, 

Early  Western  Travels,  III,  105-306). 

422.  - .  Voyage  a  V  ouest  des  mont  Alleghanys  (Paris,  1804). 

423.  Miller,  Edward  and  Frederick  P.  Wells.  History  of  Ryegate,  Vermont  (St. 

Johnsbury,  Vt.,  1913). 

424.  Miller,  Merritt  Finley.  The  Evolution  of  Reaping  Machines  (U.  S.  Dept,  of 

Agric.  Office  of  Experiment  Stations,  Bulletin  No.  103,  1902). 

425.  Mitchell,  Samuel  Augustus.  An  Accompaniment  to  Mitchell’s  Reference  and 

Distance  Map  of  the  United  States  (Philadelphia,  1834). 

426.  Mittleberger,  Gottlieb.  Journey  to  Pennsylvania  (I750-I754)  (reprinted  in  Eng¬ 

lish  translation,  Philadelphia,  1898). 

427.  Moore,  Jacob  B.  Historical  Sketch  of  Concord  (N.  H.)  (in  N.  H.  Hist.  Soc. 

Collections,  I,  I53-I59). 

428.  Moore,  Thomas.  Great  Error  of  American  Agriculture  Exposed  (Baltimore,  1801). 

429.  More,  Dr.  Nicholas.  Letter  (1686)  (in  Myers’s  Narratives,  279-293). 

430.  Morris,  James  A.  Statistical  Account  of  Several  Towns  in  the  County  of  Litch¬ 

field  (Conn.)  (New  Haven,  1811). 

431.  Morse,  Rev.  Jedidiah.  The  American  Gazetteer  (3d  ed.,  Boston,  1810). 

432.  Morse,  Jedidiah.  The  American  Geography  (3d  ed.,  Dublin,  1792). 


ALPHABETICAL  INDEX  OF  AUTHORS 


485 


433- 

434- 

435- 

436. 

437. 

438. 
439- 

440. 

441. 

442. 

443- 

444- 

445- 

446. 

447. 

448. 
449- 

450. 

451. 

452. 

453- 

454- 

455- 
456. 
457- 

458. 

459- 

460. 

461. 

462. 

463. 

464. 

465. 

466. 

467. 

468. 


469. 

470. 

471. 

472. 

473. 

474- 

475- 
476. 


Morton,  ^Nathaniel.  New  England's  Memorial  (1669)  (5th  eel.,  Boston,  1826). 

— — .  Muddy  River  and  Brookline  Records,  1634-1838  (Boston,  1875). 

Munro,  Robert.  Description  of  the  Genessee  Country  (1804)  (in  O’Callaghan 

.  a  Documentary  History  of  New  York,  II,  1 171-1188). 

Myers,  Albert  Cook  (editor).  Narratives  of  Early  Pennsylvania  West  New 
Jersey  and  Delaware  1630-1707  (N.  Y.,  1912). 
arrati\  e  About  New  England  (1665)  (in  Hutchinson  Papers,  II,  140-153). 

Nason,  Elias.  Billerica  (Mass.) ,  Centennial  Oration  (Lowell  1876). 

— - .  History  of  Dunstable  (Mass.)  (Boston,  1877). 

Neal,  Daniel.  History  of  New  England  (2  vols.,  1st  ed.,  1720;  2d  ed.,  London. 

_  J747). 

New  England  Farmer  (weekly),  T.  G.  Fessenden,  editor  (24  vols.,  Boston, 
1822-1846). 

New  England  Historical  and  Genealogical  Register  (67  vols.,  1847—1913) 

Pse\v  Hampshire.  Provincial  and  State  Papers  (30  vols.,  1867-1914). 

- .  Board  of  Agriculture,  A nnual  Reports  (1871-1913). 

— ♦ - .  State  Agricultural  Society  Transactions,  1850-1859. 

.  State  Board  of  Agriculture.  The  New  Hampshire  Repository,  I  (Concord 
1822).  ’ 

Few  Hampshire  Historical  Society.  Collections  (11  vols.,  1824-1915,  Concord 
N.  H.,  1824-1915). 

New  Haven  (Colony).  Records  of  the  Colony  and  Plantation  of  New  Haven 
(1638-1649)  (Hartford,  1857). 

New  Jersey  Archives.  See  Documents  Relating  to  the  Colonial  History  of  New 
Jersey. 

New  Jersey  Historical  Society.  Collections  (9  vols.,  1846-1900). 

New  Plymouth  Colony.  Records  (1620-1692)  (12  vols.,  Boston,  1855-1861). 

New  York  (Province).  Duke  of  York’s  Laws,  1664  (in  N.  Y.  Hist.  Soc.,  Collec¬ 
tions,  1st  Series,  I,  307-428). 

New  York.  Assembly  Journal  (49th  Session,  January  1826). 

- .  Board  of  Agriculture,  Memoirs  (3  vols.,  Albany,  1821-1826). 

- .  Census  of  1823  (in  Assembly  Journal,  49th  Session  (1826),  App.  C.). 

- .  Colonial  Laws,  I  (1664-1719). 

- .  Documents  Relative  to  the  Colonial  History  of  the  State  of  New  York 

(See  O'Callaghan,  E.  B.,  editor). 

- .  Laws  (1777-1801)  (Cook  edition,  5  vols.,  Albany,  1886). 

- .  Revised  Statutes  (3  vols.,  Albany,  1829). 

New  Y'ork  Farmer  (monthly)  (N.  Y.,  1826-1837). 

New  York  Historical  Society.  Collections  (vols.  I-V;  Second  Series,  vols. 
I-IV,  N.  Y.,  1811-1859). 

New  York  Shipping  and  Commercial  List  and  New  York  Price  Current 
(semi-weekly)  (73  vols.,  N.  Y.,  1815-1897). 

New  York  Society  for  the  Promotion  of  the  Useful  Arts.  Transactions  (4 
vols.,  N.  Y.,  1792-1819)  (vol.  I  2d  ed.,  1801). 

New  York  State  Agricultural  Society.  Transactions  (1841-1897). 

Nicholas,  Andrew.  Address  to  the  Essex  Agricultural  Society,  1820  (Salem, 
1821). 

Niles,  Hezekiah  (editor).  Niles  Weekly  Register  (75  vols.,  Baltimore,  1811- 
1849). 

North,  James  W.  History  of  Augusta,  Maine  (Augusta,  1870). 

North,  S.  N.  D.  A  Century  of  American  Wool  Manufacture  (in  Nat.  Assn,  of 
Wool  Manufacturers,  Bulletin,  XXIV  (1894),  pp.  219-251;  329-350; 
XXV  (1895),  pp.  40-63). 

Nourse,  Henry  S.  History  of  Harvard,  Massachusetts  (Harvard,  1894). 

O’Callaghan,  E.  B.  (editor).  Documents  Relative  to  the  Colonial  History  of  the 
State  of  New  York  (15  vols.,  Albany,  1853-87). 

- .  Documentary  History  of  the  State  of  New  York  (4  vols.,  Albany,  1849- 

1 851 ) • 

Ogg,  F.  A.  (editor).  Personal  Narrative  of  Travels  in  Virginia,  Maryland,  Penn¬ 
sylvania,  Ohio,  Indiana,  Kentucky,  and  of  a  Residence  in  the  Illinois 
Territory ;  (1817-1818),  by  E.  L.  Fordham  (Cleveland,  1906). 

Ohio  State  Board  of  Agriculture,  Annual  Reports  (1846-1886). 

- .  Brief  History  of  the  Ohio  State  Board  of  Agriculture  ....  and  Agri¬ 
cultural  Societies  (Columbus,  1899). 

Ohio  State  Archeological  and  Historical  Society.  Publications  (13  vols  ,  1900- 
1909). 

Onderdonk,  Henry.  Ancient  Agriculture  in  Hempstead  (Queens  County,  N.  Y.) 
(Jamaica,  N.  Y.,  1867). 


486 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


4 77- 
478. 

479- 

480. 

481. 

482. 

483. 

484. 

485. 

486. 

487. 

488. 

489. 

490. 

491. 

492. 

493- 

494- 

495- 
496. 

497- 

498. 

499- 

500. 

501. 

502. 

503. 

504. 

505. 

506. 

507. 

508. 

509. 

510. 

511. 

512. 

513. 

514. 

515. 

516. 

517. 

518. 

519. 


_ : -  Queen's  County  in  Olden  Times  (Jamaica,  N.  Y.,  1865). 

Orleans  County  (Vermont)  Historical  Society.  Proceedings  ( 1887-1891). 
Osgood,  Herbert  L.  The  American  Colonies  in  the  Seventeenth  Century  (3  vols., 
N  Y  1 904 _ 7 ) • 

Paige  Lucius  R.’  History  of  Cambridge,  Massachusetts  (1630-1877)  (Boston, 
t877) 

Palmer  Dr  Edward.  Food  Products  of  the  North  American  Indians  (in  U.  S. 

Dept,  of  Agric.  Annual  Report  (1870),  pp.  404-428)-  f  .  .  , 

Palmer,  John.  Journal  of  Travels  in  the  United  States  of  North  America  and 
in  Lower  Canada  (1817)  (London,  1818).  .  , 

Papers  Relating  to  Long  Island  (in  O’Callaghan,  Documentary  History  of 
New  York,  I,  627-686). 

Papers  Relating  to  the  Trade  and  Manufactures  of  the  Province  of  New 
York  (1705-1757)  (in  O’Callaghan,  Documentary  History  of  New 

York  I  709— 736) . 

Parkinson,  Richard.  A  Tour  in  America  (1798-1800)  (2  vols.,  London,  1805). 
Parsons,  Isaac.  An  Account  of  New  Gloucester  (Maine)  (1824)  (in  Maine  Hist. 

Soc.  Collections,  1st  Series,  II,  150-164). 

Paschall,  Thomas.  Letter  (1683)  (in  Myers’s  Narratives,  245-254) . 

Pastorius,  Francis  Daniel.  Circumstantial  Geographical  Description  of  L  enn - 
sylvania  (1700)  (in  Myers’s  Narratives,  353-448). 

Pease  John  C.,  and  John  M1.  Niles.  Gazetteer  of  the  States  of  Connecticut  and 
Rhode  Island  (Hartford,  1819). 

Peck,  J.  M.  New  Guide  for  Emigrants  to  the  West  (Boston,  1836).  . 

Penn,  William.  A  Further  Account  of  the  Province  of  Pennsylvania  (1685)  (m 
Myers’s  Narratives,  255-278).  .  ,  _  ,  ,  .  r 

_ .  Letters  to  the  Committee  of  the  Free  Society  of  Traders  (1683)  (in 

Myers’s  Narratives,  217-244).  ,  AT 

_ .  Some  Account  of  the  Province  of  Pennsylvania  (1681)  (in  Myers  Narra¬ 
tives,  197-215).  7T  ,  .  -r,,  ,  1 

Pennsylvania,  (Province).  Charters  and  Acts  of  Assembly  (2  vols.,  Philadel- 

phici  1762)  • 

Pennsylvania.  Abridgement  of  the  Laws  of  Pennsylvania  (Philadelphia,  1801). 

- .  Archives  (Series  1-7,  101  vols.,  1874-1914)-.  .  .  .  „  .  . 

_ .  Dept,  of  Internal  Affairs,  Bureau  of  Industrial  Statistics,  Annual  Reports 

(41  vols.,  i874-I9i5)- 
- .  Laws  (Philadelphia,  1728). 

- State  Board  of  Agriculture  Annual  Reports,  1877-1894. 

- .  Statutes  at  Large  (1682-1801). 

Pennsylvania  Agricultural  Society.  Memoirs  (1  vol.,  1824). 

Pennsylvania  Historical  Society.  Memoirs  (13  vols.,  1826-1891). 
Pennsylvania  Magazine  of  History  and  Biography  (27  vols.,  1877-1904). 
Pennsylvania  Railroad  Company.  13th  Annual  Report  (i860).  . 

Perry,  A.  L.  Scotch-Irish  in  New  England  (The  Scotch-Irish  in  America,  Second 
Congress,  1890,  Proceedings  and  Addresses,  1 07-144). 

Phelps,  Charles  Shepherd.  Rural  Life  in  Litchfield  County  (Norfolk,  Conn., 

Philadelphia1  Society  for  Promoting  Agriculture.  Memoirs  (5  vols.,  1808- 

Phillips,  Deane.  Horse  Raising  in  Colonial  New  England  (Cornell  Agric.  Expt. 
Sta.  Memoirs,  54  (May,  1922)). 

Phillips,  Ulrich  Bonnell.  American  Negro  Slavery  (N.  Y.,  1918). 

Piper,  Charles  V.  Forage  Plants  and  their  Culture  (N.  Y.,  1914). 

Piper,  Charles  V.,  and  Katherine  S.  Bort.  Early  Agricultural  History  of 
Timothy  (in  Journal  of  Am.  Soc.  of  Agronomy,  VII  (1915).  PP-  I_I4)- 
Pitkin,  Timothy.  Statistical  View  of  the  C ommerce  of  the  United  States  of 
America  (Hartford,  Conn.,  1816,  2d  ed.,  1817;  3d  ed.,  1835). 

The  Ploughboy  (weekly)  (Albany,  1819-1823). 

Plumb,  Charles  S.  Types  and  Breeds  of  Farm  Animals  (Boston,  1906). 
Plymouth,  Massachusetts.  Records  of  the  Town  of  Plymouth  (Plymouth, 
1889). 

Plymouth  Colony.  See  New  Plymouth  Colony. 

Poole y,  W.  V.  The  Early  Settlement  of  Illinois  1830-1850  (Univ.  of  Wisconsin 
Bulletin  No.  220,  History  Series,  I,  No.  4,  Madison,  Wis.,  1908). 
Porter,  Rev.  Noah.  Historical  Discourse  ....  Farmington  (Conn.)  (Hartford, 
1841). 

Potter,  C.  E.  Native  Cattle  of  New  Hampshire  (in  N.  H.  State  Agric.  Soc. 
Transactions  (1854),  pp.  226-237). 


ALPHABETICAL  INDEX  OF  AUTHORS  487 


520.  Potter,  Elisha  R.  French  Settlements  in  Rhode  Island  (in  R.  I.  Historical 

Tracts,  No.  5,  Providence,  1879). 

521.  Powell,  J.  W.  Physiographic  Regions  of  the  United  States  (in  The  Physiography 

of  the  United  States,  published  by  the  National  Geographic  Society, 
N.  Y.,  1896). 

522.  Pownall,  Thomas,  M.P.  Topographical  Description  of  the  Middle  British  Colo¬ 

nies  (London,  1776). 

523.  Prairie  Farmer  (Established  as  Union  Agriculturist,  monthly,  Chicago,  1840. 

Continued  as  The  Prairie  Farmer,  1843-1856.  Weekly,  1857.  Combined 
with  Emery’s  Journal  of  Agriculture,  1858.  Continued  as  The  Prairie 
Farmer,  1859-  ). 

524.  Present  State  of  the  Colony  of  West-Jersey  (1681)  (in  Myers’s  Narratives, 

187-195). 

525.  Prince,  Thomas,  M.  A.  Annals  of  New  England  (3d  ed.,  Boston,  1826). 

526.  Printz,  Governor  Johan.  Reports  (1644,  1653)  (in  Myers’s  Narratives,  91-129). 

527.  Prothero,  R.  E.  English  Farming,  Past  and  Present  (London,  1921). 

528.  Proud,  Robert.  History  of  Pennsylvania  (1681-1742)  (2  vols.,  Philadelphia,  1798). 

529.  Putnam,  Henry.  Touches  on  Agriculture  (Portland,  Maine,  1824). 

530.  Quincy,  Edmund.  Life  of  Josiah  Quincy  (Boston,  1867). 

531.  Randall,  Henry  S.,  L.L.D.  Fine  Wool  Sheep  Husbaridry  (Albany,  1862). 

532-  Randolph,  Edward.  Narrative  or  Report  on  the  Colonies  (1676)  (in  Hutchinson 

Papers,  II,  210-251). 

533-  Renick,  William.  Cattle  Trade  of  the  Scioto  Valley  (in  Ohio  State  Bd.  Agric. 

3d  Annual  Report  (1848),  pp.  162-164). 

534.  - .  Early  Cattle  Trade  in  Ohio  (in  Farmers’  Chronicle,  I  (1868),  pp.  230-231). 

535.  Report  of  a  French  Protestant  Refugee  in  Boston  (1687)  (Trans,  by  E.  T. 

Fisher,  Brooklyn,  1868). 

536.  Representation  of  New  Netherland  (1650)  (in  Jameson’s  Narratives,  287-354). 

537.  Reynolds,  John.  My  Own  Times  (Chicago,  1879). 

538.  Rhode  Island  (Colony).  Records  of  the  Colony  and  of  the  State  of  Rhode 

Island  1636-1792  (10  vols.,  Providence,  1856-65). 

539-  Rhode  Island  Historical  Society.  Collections  (10  vols.,  Providence,  1827-1902). 

540.  - .  Publications  (New  Series,  8  vols.,  1893-1901). 

541.  Rhode  Island  Historical  Tracts  (1st  Series,  Nos.  1-20;  2d  Series,  Nos.  1-5, 

Providence,  1877-1896). 

542-  Ripley,  Lincoln.  Description  and  History  of  Waterford  in  the  County  of  York 

{Maine)  (1803)  (in  Mass.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  1st  Series,  IX,  137- 
147). 

543.  Rising,  Johan.  Reports  (1654-1655)  (in  Myers’s  Narratives,  131-165). 

544.  Roberts,  Ellis  H.  New  York  (in  American  Commonwealth  Series,  2  vols.,  N. 

Y.,  1887). 

545.  Roberts,  Isaac  Phillips.  The  Fertility  of  the  Land  (10th  ed.,  N.  Y.,  1907). 

546.  Roberts,  Job.  The  Pennsylvania  Farmer  (Philadelphia,  1804). 

547.  Rogers,  Edward  D.  Four  Southern  Magazines  (Dissertation  U.  of  Va.,  1902,  Rich¬ 

mond,  Va.,  1902). 

548.  Rogers,  Henry  D.  Report  on  the  Geological  Survey  of  New  Jersey  (Philadel¬ 

phia,  1836). 

549.  Rogers,  James  E.  Thorold.  A  History  of  Agriculture  and  Prices  in  England 

(7  vols.,  Oxford,  1866-1902). 

550.  - .  Six  Centuries  of  Labour  and  Wages  (2  vols.,  London,  1884). 

551.  Roosevelt,  Theodore.  Winning  of  the  West  (4  vols.,  N.  Y.,  1904). 

552.  Rose,  Robert  Hutchinson  (C.  B.  Johnson,  M.D.,  pseudonym).  Letters  from  the 

British  Settlement  in  Pennsylvania  (Philadelphia,  1819). 

553.  Rowley,  Massachusetts.  Town  Records,  1  (1639-1672)  (Rowley,  1894). 

554.  Ruggles,  Thomas.  History  of  Guilford  (in  Mass.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  1st 

Series,  X,  90-101). 

555.  Runnels,  M.  T.  History  of  Sanbornton,  New  Hampshire  (2  vols.,  Boston,  1882). 

556.  Rush,  Benjamin.  Account  of  ...  .  the  German  Inhabitants  of  Pennsylvania 

(1789)  (reprinted  in  Penn.-German  Soc.,  Proceedings  and  Addresses, 
XIX  (1910),  pp.  1-121). 

557.  Russell,  Edward.  History  of  North  Yarmouth  (in  Maine  Hist.  Soc.  Collections, 

1st  Series,  II,  165-188). 

558.  Salem,  Massachusetts.  Town  Records  (2  vols.,  Salem,  Mass.,  1868,  1913). 

559*  Sanborn,  Edwin  D.  History  of  New  Hampshire  (Manchester,  1875). 

560.  Sato,  Shosuke.  The  Land  Question  in  the  United  States  (in  /.  H.  U.  Studies  in 

Historical  and  Political  Science,  IV,  Nos.  7-9  (1886)  ). 


488 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


561.  Savage,  James.  Genealogical  Dictionary  of  First  Settlers  of  New  England  (4  vols., 

Boston,  i860). 

562.  Scharf,  John  Thomas,  and  Thompson  Westcott.  History  of  Philadelphia  (3 

vols.,  Philadelphia,  1884). 

563.  Schmidt,  Louis  Bernard.  Topical  Studies  and  References  on  the  Economic  His¬ 

tory  of  American  Agriculture  (Philadelphia,  1919). 

564.  Schoepf,  Johann  David.  Travels  in  the  Confederation,  1783-1784  (Trans,  and 

edited  by  Alfred  J.  Morrison,  2  vols.,  Philadelphia,  1911). 

565.  Schoolcraft,  Henry  R.  Travels  in  the  Central  Portions  of  the  Mississippi  Valley 

(N.  Y.,  1825). 

566.  Scot,  George.  Model  of  the  Government  of  East  New  Jersey  (1685)  (reprinted  in 

N.  J.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  I,  239-333). 

567.  Scott,  Joseph.  Geographical  Description  of  Pennsylvania  (Philadelphia,  1806). 

568.  Sears,  Robert  (editor).  Pictorial  Description  of  the  United  States  (N.  Y.,  1848). 

569.  Semple,  Ellen  Churchill.  American  History  and  its  Geographic  Conditions  (N. 

Y.,  1903).  .  .  .  .  , 

570.  Shaler,  Nathaniel  Southgate.  Physiography  of  North  America  (in  Winsor’s 

History  of  America,  IV,  pp.  i-xxx). 

571.  - .  Man  and  Nature  in  America  (N.  Y.,  1891). 

572.  - .  The  United  States  of  America  (2  vols.,  N.  Y.,  1894). 

573.  Shattuck,  Lemuel.  History  of  Concord  (inc.  Bedford,  Acton,  Lincoln,  Carlisle, 

Boston,  1835). 

574.  Sheffield,  John  Baker  Holroyd,  1st  Earl  of.  Observations  in  the  Commerce  of 

the  American  States  (2d  ed.,  London,  1783). 

575.  Sheldon,  George.  The  Common  Field  of  Deerfield  (in  Pocumtuck  Valley  Memo¬ 

rial  Assn.  History  and  Proceedings  V,  238-254). 

576.  - .  Forty  Years  of  Frontier  Life  in  the  Pocumtuck  Valley  (in  New  England 

Magazine,  IV  (1886),  pp.  236-249). 

577.  - .  History  of  Deerfield  (2  vols.,  Deerfield,  1896). 

578.  - .  Old  Time  Travel  and  Traffic  on  the  Connecticut  (in  Pocumtuck  Valley 

Memorial  Assn.  Ill,  1 17-129). 

579.  Shepherd,  William  R.  Historical  Atlas  (2d  ed.,  N.  Y.,  1921). 

580.  Sketches  of  Northwood  (New  Hampshire)  (in  N.  H.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections, 

111,67-95).  .  . 

581.  Smith,  George,  M.  D.  History  of  Delaware  County,  Pennsylvania  (Philadelphia, 

1862). 

582.  Smith,  Rev.  James.  Tours  into  Kentucky  and  the  Northwest  Territory ,  1783, 

1795,  1797  (in  Ohio  State  Arch.  &  Hist.  Soc.  Quarterly,  XVI,  348-401). 

583.  Smith,  John.  Advertisements  for  the  Unexperienced  Planters  of  New  England 

or  Anywhere  (in  Mass.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  3d  Series,  III,  1-53). 

584.  — - .  Description  of  New  England  (1616)  (in  Mass.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  3d 

Series,  VI). 

585.  - .  Generali  Historic  of  Virginia  (reprinted  in  part  in  Levermore’s  Forerun¬ 

ners  of  the  Pilgrims,  II,  643-753). 

586.  Smith,  Richard.  Journal  (1769)  (ed.  by  F.  W.  Halsey,  N.  Y.,  1906). 

587.  Smith,  Samuel.  History  of  the  Colony  of  New  Jersey  (Burlington,  1765). 

588.  Smith,  Thomas.  Journal  (in  Smith’s  and  Deane’s  Journals,  Portland,  1849). 

589.  Smith,  Thomas  and  Samuel  Deane.  Journals  (with  Summary  History  of  Port¬ 

land  (Wm.  Willis,  ed.,)  Portland,  1849). 

590.  Smith,  William.  History  of  the  Province  of  New  York  (2  vols.,  N.  Y.,  1829). 

591.  Smith,  William  Henry.  History  of  the  State  of  Indiana  (2  vols.,  1903). 

592.  Snow,  Caleb  H.  A  History  of  Boston  (Boston,  1825). 

593.  Some  Letters  ....  from  Pennsylvania  (1691)  (in  Penn.  Mag.  of  History, 

IV  (1880),  pp.  189-201). 

594.  Some  Observations  Relating  to  ...  .  Massachusetts  Bay  (Boston,  1750). 

595.  Spafford,  H.  G.  Gazetteer  of  New  York  (Albany,  1813). 

596.  Spurrier,  John.  The  Practical  Farmer  (Wilmington,  1793). 

597.  Stakman,  E.  C.  The  Black  Stem  Rust  and  the  Barberry  (in  U.  S.  Dept.  Agric. 

Yearbook  (1918),  pp.  75-100). 

598.  Steiner,  Bernard  Christian.  History  of  Guilford  and  Madison,  Connecticut 

(Baltimore,  1897). 

599.  Stevens,  Lewis  T.  History  of  Cape  May  County,  New  Jersey  (1887). 

600.  Stevens,  Neil  E.  America’s  First  Agricultural  School  (in  The  Scientific  Monthly, 

XIII,  No.  6  (1921),  pp.  531-540). 

601.  Stewart,  Frank  H.  Notes  on  Old  Gloucester  County,  New  Jersey  (2  vols.,  1917). 

602.  Stiles,  Henry.  History  of  Ancient  Windsor,  Connecticut  (Rev.  ed.  2  vols.,  Hart¬ 

ford,  1891). 


ALPHABETICAL  INDEX  OF  AUTHORS  489 


603.  Stone,  Frederick  D.  The  Founding  of  Pennsylvania  (in  Winsor’s  History  of 

America,  III,  461-516). 

604.  Strickland,  William.  Observations  on  the  Agriculture  of  the  United  States  of 

America  (1801). 

605.  Sullivan,  James.  History  of  the  District  of  Maine  (Boston,  1795). 

606.  Summer,  W.  G.  History  of  American  Currency  (N.  Y.,  1874). 

607.  Talbot,  George  Foster.  Temperance  and  the  Drink  Question  in  the  Old  Time 

(in  Maine  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  2d  Series,  VI,  357-392). 

608.  Tanner,  Edwin  P.  The  Province  of  New  Jersey  1664-1738  (in  Columbia  Univ. 

Studies  in  History,  Economics  and  Public  Law,  XXX  (1908). 

609.  Taylor,  John.  Journal  on  a  Mission  through  the  Mohawk  and  Black  River 

Country  (1802)  (in  O’Callaghan,  Documentary  History  of  New  York, 
III,  1107-1150). 

610.  Temple,  J.  H.  History  of  Whately,  Massachusetts  (Boston,  1872). 

61 1.  Temple  and  Sheldon.  History  of  the  Town  of  Northheld,  Massachusetts  (Al¬ 

bany,  1875). 

612.  Ten  Days  in  Ohio  (in  Am.  Journal  of  Science,  XXV  (1834),  pp.  216-257). 

613.  Thomas,  Gabriel.  An  Historical  and  Geographical  Account  of  Pensilvania  and  of 

West-New-Jersey  (1698)  (in  Myers’s  Narratives,  307-352). 

614.  Thompson,  Benjamin  Franklin.  History  of  Long  Island  (2  vols.,  2d  ed.,  N. 

Y.,  1843). 

615.  Thompson,  Francis  M.  History  of  Greenfield,  Massachusetts  (2  vols.,  Greenfield, 

1904). 

616.  Thompson,  Zadock.  Gazetteer  of  the  State  of  Vermont  (Montpelier  (Vt.),  1824). 

617.  - .  History  of  Vermont  (Burlington  (Vt.),  1842). 

618.  Thomson,  Peter  G.  Bibliography  of  the  State  of  Ohio  (Cincinnati,  1880). 

619.  Thwaites,  R.  G.  Early  Western  Travels  (32  vols.,  Cleveland,  1904-1907). 

620.  Tibbitts,  George.  Home  Market  for  the  Sale  of  Agricultural  Productions  (in  N. 

Y.  Bd.  of  Agric.  Memoirs,  III  (1826),  pp.  289-325). 

621.  Tilton,  James,  M.  D.  Present  State  of  Husbandry  and  Agriculture  in  the  State  of 

Delaware  (in  American  Museum,  V  (1789),  pp.  375-382). 

622.  de  Tocqueville,  Alexis.  Democracy  in  America  (trans.  by  Henry  Reeve,  4  vols., 

London,  1835-1840). 

623.  Tooke,  Thomas.  Thoughts  and  Details  on  the  High  and  Low  Prices  of  the  Last 

Thirty  Years  (2d  ed.,  London,  1824). 

624.  Treat,  Payson  Jackson.  The  National  Land  System,  1785-1820  (N.  Y.,  1910). 

625.  Trego,  Charles  B.  Geography  of  Pennsylvania  (Philadelphia,  1843). 

626.  Trimble,  William.  Introductory  Manual  for  the  Study  and  Reading  of  Agrarian 

History  (printed  for  the  Dept,  of  History  and  Social  Science  in  the 
North  Dakota  Agric.  College,  Fargo,  N.  D.,  1917). 

627.  True,  A.  C.  Agricultural  Education  in  the  United  States  (in  U.  S.  Dept.  Agric. 

Yearbook  (1899),  pp.  157-190). 

628.  True,  P.  A.  The  Salisbury  Commoners  (in  Amesbury  (Mass.)  Hist.  Soc.  Trans¬ 

actions,  I  (1901). 

629.  True  Relation  Concerning  the  Estate  of  New  England  (1634)  (in  New  En¬ 

gland  Hist.  &  Genealogical  Register,  XI  (1886),  pp.  68-73). 

630.  Trumbull,  J.  Hammond.  Memorial  History  of  Hartford  County,  Connecticut 

(2  vols.,  Boston,  1886). 

631.  Trumbull,  James  Russell.  History  of  Northampton,  Massachusetts  (2  vols., 

Northampton,  1898). 

632.  Tryon,  Rolla  Milton.  Household  Manufactures  in  the  United  States  1640-1860 

(Chicago,  1917). 

633.  Tryon,  William.  Report  on  the  State  of  the  Province  of  New  York  (1774)  (in 

O’Callaghan,  Documentary  History  of  New  York,  I,  737-769). 

634.  Tucker,  Gilbert  M.  American  Agricultural  Periodicals  (Privately  printed,  Al¬ 

bany,  1909). 

635.  Tuckerman,  H.  T.  America  and  her  Commentators  with  a  Critical  Sketch  of 

Travel  in  the  United  States  (N.  Y.,  1864). 

636.  Turner,  Frederick  Jackson.  Colonization  of  the  West  (in  Am.  Hist.  Review, 

XI  (1905-6),  PP-  303-327); 

637.  - .  The  Frontier  in  American  History  (N.  Y.,  1920). 

638.  - .  The  Old  West  (in  Wisconsin  Hist.  Soc.  Proceedings  (1908),  pp.  212-216). 

639.  — - - .  The  Rise  of  the  New  West,  i8ig-i82g  (N.  Y.,  1906). 

640.  Turner,  Orsamus.  History  of  the  Phelps  and  Gorham  Purchase  (Rochester, 

1852).  < 

641.  - .  Pioneer  History  of  the  Holland  Purchase  of  Western  Nezv  York  (Buffalo, 

1849). 


490 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


642.  United  States.  American  State  Papers:  Commerce  and  Navigation  (2  vols.,  I 

(1789-1815)  ;  II  (1815-1823),  Washington,  1832-1834). 

643.  - .  Bureau  of  Animal  Industry,  (Dept,  of  Agriculture) .  Special  Report  on 

the  Sheep  Industry  of  the  United  States  (Washington,  1892). 

644.  - .  Bureau  of  Soils  (Dept,  of  Agriculture) .  Soils  of  the  United  States,  Bulle¬ 

tin,  No.  96. 

645.  - .  Bureau  of  Statistics  (Treasury  Department) .  Report  on  the  Internal 

Commerce  of  the  United  States  (1887)  (Washington,  1888). 

646.  - .  Census  of  1840  (Washington,  1841). 

647.  - .  Census  of  1850  (Washington,  1853). 

648.  - .  Census  of  i860,  Agriculture  (  Washington,  1864). 

649.  - .  Census  of  1880,  vol.  I,  Population;  vol.  Ill,  Agriculture  (Washington, 

1883). 

650.  - .  Census  of  1910,  vol.  I,  Population  (Washington,  1913). 

651.  - .  Department  of  Agriculture.  Annual  Report  1867. 

652.  - .  Documents  Relative  to  Manufactures  in  the  United  States  (Ex.  Doc.  308, 

22d  Cong.  1st  Sess.,  2  vols.,  1832). 

653.  - .  Office  of  Farm  Management.  (Dept,  of  Agriculture)  Atlas  of  American 

Agriculture  (Washington,  1919). 

654.  - .  Patent  Office,  Annual  Reports  of  the  Commissioner  of  Patents  ^1839- 

1862). 

655.  - .  Senate  Committee  of  Finance.  Rates  of  Duty  on  Imports  1789-1890  (51st 

Cong.  2d  Session,  Senate  Report,  No.  2130). 

656.  - .  Wholesale  Prices,  Wages  and  Transportation  (1840-1891)  52nd  Cong.  2d 

Sess.  Senate  Report  No.  1394  (Aldrich  Report)  (3  vols.,  Washington, 

1893). 

657.  - .  Register  of  the  Treasury.  Commerce  and  Navigation  of  the  United  States, 

(32  vols.,  Washington,  1822-1866). 

658.  - .  Treasury  Department.  Statistics  of  the  Foreign  and  Domestic  Commerce 

of  the  United  States  (1863)  (Washington,  1864). 

659.  Updike,  Wilkins.  History  of  the  Episcopal  Church  in  Narragansett,  Rhode 

Island  (3  vols.,  2d  ed.,  Boston,  1907). 

660.  Uring,  Nathaniel.  History  of  the  Voyages  and  Travels  of  Capt.  Nathaniel  Uring 

(London,  1745). 

661.  Usher,  Roland  G.  The  Pilgrims  and  their  History  (N.  Y.,  1918). 

662.  Van  der  Donck,  Adriaen.  Description  of  the  New  Netherlands  (1656)  (in  N.  Y. 

Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  2d  Series,  I,  125-242). 

663.  Vanderkemp  Papers  (in  Buffalo  Hist.  Soc.  Publications,  II  (1880),  pp.  33-116). 

664.  Van  Tienhoven,  Cornelis.  Information  Relative  to  Taking  up  Land  in  New 

Netherland  (1650)  (in  O’Callaghan,  Documentary  History  of  New 
York,  IV,  25-36). 

665.  Van  Wassenaer,  Nicolaes.  Historisch  Verhael  (1624-1630)  (trans.  in  Jameson’s 

Narratives,  63-96). 

666.  Vermont.  Laws  of  Vermont  (Windsor,  Vt.,  1825). 

667.  Viles,  Dr.  J  Population  and  Extent  of  Settlement  in  Missouri  before  1804  (in 

Mo.  Hist.,  Review,  V  (1910-11),  pp.  189-207). 

668.  Violette,  E.  M.  Early  Settlements  in  Missouri  (in  Mo.  Hist.  Review,  I  (1906-07), 

pp.  38-52). 

669.  Virginia  Gazette  (weekly)  (Williamsburg,  Va.,  1736-1780). 

670.  Walker,  Charles.  Sketch  of  New  Ipswich  (N.  H.)  (in  N.  H.  Hist.  Soc.  Collec¬ 

tions,  v,  155-175). 

671.  Walker,  Joseph  B.  House  and  Farm  of  the  First  Minister  of  Concord,  New 

Hampshire  (Concord,  1906). 

672.  - .  Semi-Centennial  Address  before  the  Merrimack  County  (New  Hampshire) 

Agricultural  Society,  1874  (in  N.  H.  Bd.  Agric.  4th  Annual  Report, 

1874). 

673.  Walker,  Timothy.  Diaries  (1746-1780)  (ed.  by  Joseph  B.  Walker  in  N.  H.  Hist. 

Soc.  Collections,  IX,  123-191). 

674.  Waller,  Elbert.  Illinois  Pioneer  Days  (Litchfield,  Ill.,  1918). 

6 75*  Washington,  George.  Letters  on  Agriculture  to  Arthur  Young  and  Sir  John 
Sinclair  (Franklin  Knight,  ed.,  Washington,  1847). 

676.  Waters,  Thomas  Franklin.  7  he  Early  Homes  of  the  Puritans  (in  Essex  Insti¬ 

tute  Hist.  Collections,  XXXIII  (1897),  pp.  45-79). 

677.  Watertown,  Massachusetts.  Watertown  Records  (Watertown  Mass.,  4  vols., 

1894-1906). 


ALPHABETICAL  INDEX  OF  AUTHORS 


491 


678.  Watson,  Elkanah.  History  of  Agricultural  Societies  on  the  Modern  Berkshire 

System  from  ....  1807  to  ...  .  1820  (printed  in  History  of  the 
Rise,  progress  and  existing  conditions  of  the  western  Canals  in  the 
State  of  Hew  York,  Albany,  1820). 

679.  - .  Men  and  Times  of  the  Revolution  (N.  Y.,  1856). 

680.  Watson,  John.  Account  of  Buckingham  and  Solebury,  Bucks  County,  Pennsyl¬ 

vania  (1804)  (in  Hist.  Soc.  of  Pennsylvania  Memoirs,  I  (1826),  pp. 

279-311). 

681.  Watson,  John  F.  Annals  of  Philadelphia  (Philadelphia,  1830;  2d  ed.,  2  vols.,  1844). 

682.  Watson,  Winslow  C.  Military  and  Civil  History  of  the  County  of  Essex,  New 

York  (N.  Y.,  1869). 

683.  Weeden,  W.  B.  Early  Rhode  Island  (N.  Y.,  1910). 

684.  - .  Social  and  Economic  History  of  New  England  1620-1789  (2  vols.,  Boston, 

1890). 

685.  Welby,  Adlard.  Visit  to  North  America  (in  Thwaites,  Early  Western  Travels, 

xii,  139-341). 

686.  Weld,  Isaac  jr.  Travels  Through  the  States  of  North  America,  I795~I797  (4th 

ed.,  2  vols.,  London,  1807). 

687.  Welker,  Martin.  Farm  Life  in  Central  Ohio  Sixty  Years  Ago  (in  Western 

Reserve  Hist.  Soc.  Tracts,  IV,  No.  86). 

688.  Western  Farmer  (monthly)  (Cincinnati,  1839-1845). 

689.  Wheeler,  George  A.,  and  Henry  W.  History  of  Brunszvick,  Top  sham,  and  Harps- 

well,  Maine  (Boston,  1878). 

690.  Whipple,  Joseph.  Geographical  and  Statistical  View  of  the  District  of  Maine 

(Bangor,  1816). 

691.  Wilder,  David.  History  of  Leominster  (Mass.)  (Fitchburg,  Mass.,  1853). 

692.  Williams,  Roger.  Key  to  the  Indian  Language  (in  R.  I.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections, 

I,  Providence,  1827). 

693.  Williams,  Samuel,  L.L.D.  Natural  and  Civil  History  of  Vermont  (2  vols.,  2d 

ed.,  Burlington,  1809). 

694.  Willich,  A.  F.  M.  Domestic  Encyclopedia,  1st  Am.  Ed.,  by  James  Mease,  5  vols., 

Philadelphia,  1804). 

695.  Willis,  Hon.  William.  Descriptive  Catalogue  of  Books  and  Pamphlets  Relating 

to  the  History  of  Statistics  of  Maine  (in  Historical  Magazine,  2d 
Series,  VII,  March,  1870). 

696.  - .  Scotch  Irish  Immigration  (in  Maine  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  1st  Series, 

VI,  pp.  1-37 ) . 

697.  — * - .  Summary  History  of  Portland  (Maine)  (in  Journals  of  Rev.  Thomas 

Smith  and  Rev.  Samuel  Deane). 

698.  Willoughby,  Charles  C.  Houses  and  Gardens  of  the  New  England  Indians  (in 

Am.  Anthropologist,  New  Series,  VIII  (1906),  pp.  115-132). 

699.  Winfield,  Charles  H.  History  of  Hudson  County  (N.  J.)  (N.  Y.,  1874). 

700.  Winslow,  E.  Good  News  from  New  England  (in  Mass.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections, 

1st  Series,  VIII,  239-277). 

701.  Winsor,  Justin  (editor).  Memorial  History  of  Boston  (4  vols.,  Boston,  1880-81). 

702.  - .  Narrative  and  Critical  History  of  America  (8  vols.,  Boston,  1884-89). 

703.  Winthrop,  John.  Conclusions  for  the  Plantation  in  New  England  (Old  South 

Leaflets,  II,  No.  50,  Boston,  1894). 

704.  - .  Journal  (1630-1649)  (also  known  as  History  of  New  England,  2d  ed.,  2 

vols.,  Boston,  1853). 

705.  - .  Life  and  Letters  (ed.  by  Robert  C.  Winthrop,  2  vols.  (1864-1867)  ). 

706.  Winthrop,  John  jr.  (Governor  of  Connecticut  Colony.)  The  Description,  Culture 

and  Use  of  Maize  (in  Philosophical  Transactions,  Royal  Society  of 
London,  XII  (1678),  No.  142,  pp.  1065-1069.  Quoted  partly  in  Neal, 
History  of  New  England,  II,  198). 

707.  Winthrop  Papers  (in  Mass.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  3d  Series,  IX,  226-301;  X, 

1-26;  5th  Series,  VIII). 

708.  Wisconsin  State  Agricultural  Society.  Transactions  (1851-1896). 

709.  Wood,  Frederic  J.  The  Turnpikes  of  New  England  (Boston,  1919). 

710.  Wood,  Silas.  Sketch  of  Long  Island  (Brooklyn,  1828). 

71 1.  Wood,  William.  N ew -England' s  Prospect  (1634)  (Prince  Society  edition,  Bos¬ 

ton,  1865). 

712.  Woods,  John.  Two  Years’  Residence  in  the  Illinois  Country  (London,  1822). 

713.  Worcester  Magazine  and  Historical  Journal  (monthly)  (2  vols.,  1825-1826, 

Worcester,  Mass.). 

714.  Worth,  Henry  Barnard.  Nantucket  Lands  and  Land  Owners  (in  Nantucket  Hist. 

Assn.  II,  Bulletin  No.  1  (1901)). 


492 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


7i5-  Wright,  Carroll  D.  Wages  and  Prices:  1752-1860  (in  Mass.  Bureau  of  Statistics 

of  Labor,  16th  Annual  Report  (1885),  Parts  III  and  IV). 

716.  Wright,  Chester  Whitney.  Wool-Grozving  and  the  Tariff  ( Harvard  Economic 

Studies,  V,  Boston,  1910). 

717.  Young,  Alexander.  Chronicles  of  the  First  Planters  of  the  Colony  of  Massachu¬ 

setts  Bay  (1623-1636)  (Boston,  1846). 

718.  Young,  Andrew  W.  History  of  Chatauqua  County,  New  York  (Buffalo,  1875). 

UNPUBLISHED. 

719.  Beddall,  Marcus  Melvin.  Settlement  and  Development  of  the  Blue-Grass  Region 

of  Kentucky  (Thesis,  University  of  Wisconsin,  1897). 

720.  Connecticut.  Tax  Lists,  1796,  1812  (in  Comptroller’s  Office,  Hartford,  Conn.). 

721.  Goodrich,  Samuel.  Statistical  Account  of  Ridgefield  in  the  County  of  Fairfield 

( Conn .)  (written  about  1800.  MS.  in  Conn.  Hist.  Soc.,  Library,  Hart¬ 
ford,  Conn.). 

722.  Massachusetts.  Valuation  Returns,  1767,  1801,  18 11  (in  Archives,  State  House, 

Boston,  Mass.). 

723.  Rogers,  Medad  (minister  of  New  Fairfield,  Conn.).  Account  Book  (1784-1822) 

(in  New  Haven  Hist.  Soc.  Library,  New  Haven,  Conn). 

724.  Stine,  O.  C.  Economic  History  of  Wheat  in  the  United  States  (Ph.D.  thesis, 

University  of  Wisconsin,  1921.  MS.  in  Bureau  of  Agricultural  Eco¬ 
nomics,  Department  of  Agriculture,  Washington,  D.  C.). 

725.  Thompson,  James  Westfall.  History  of  Stock-Raising  in  America  (MS.  in 

Bureau  of  Agricultural  Economics,  Washington,  D.  C.). 


MISCELLANEOUS  STATISTICS. 

Table  65. — Prices  of  farm  products  and  general  prices. 

(1825  =  100.) 


[Sources:  See  page  191.] 


Year. 

Index  No. 
of  general 
prices. 

Index  No. 
of  farm 
products. 

Year. 

Index  No. 
of  general 
prices. 

Index  No. 
of  farm 
products. 

Year. 

Index  No. 
of  general 
prices. 

Index  No. 
of  farm 
products. 

l8oi 

155-5 

183.8 

1821 

IO2.3 

94-7 

1841 

95-3 

99-3 

1802 

127.7 

130.7 

1822 

105.3 

107.0 

1842 

85-3 

90.1 

1803 

131.2 

128.2 

1823 

100.  I 

IO4.O 

1843 

80.3 

79-4 

1804 

140.6 

139-8 

1824 

98.9 

103.8 

1844 

85.8 

80.1 

1805 

144.9 

159-7 

1825 

100.0 

100.0 

1845 

89.4 

92.8 

1806 

141.6 

155-4 

1826 

99.4 

106.7 

1846 

91. 1 

98.2 

1807 

134-3 

146.7 

1827 

99-6 

99.6 

1847 

98.8 

113.2 

1808 

131-0 

I2S.2 

1828 

95-2 

89.7 

1848 

89.4 

94-4 

1809 

145.0 

132.9 

1829 

94.1 

90.2 

1849 

90.5 

93-4 

l8lO 

150.4 

153-2 

1830 

91.4 

91.0 

1850 

94.6 

99-3 

l8ll 

145-7 

147-4 

1831 

96.7 

99-6 

1851 

96.7 

114-7 

1812 

148. 1 

136.9 

1832 

98.1 

104.7 

1852 

99.6 

119.7 

1813 

172.4 

172.8 

1833 

96.8 

no. 6 

1853 

108.3 

125.0 

1814 

214.8 

212.4 

1834 

90. 1 

97.2 

1854 

120.5 

140.8 

1815 

168.6 

170.  I 

1835 

103.8 

116.2 

1855 

130.5 

147.2 

1816 

143.6 

180.  I 

1836 

II5-7 

136.5 

1856 

129.8 

124.9 

1817 

145-4 

199.9 

1837 

1 14- 7 

137-7 

1857 

135-5 

139.2 

1818 

I4I-5 

179-5 

1838 

no. 2 

126.1 

1858 

114. 5 

115. 2 

1819 

124.7 

137-0 

1839 

115.2 

134-6 

1859 

117. 2 

123.7 

1820 

106.9 

109.5 

1840 

98.3 

113-8 

i860 

II5-2 

II3-5 

Table  66. — Exports  of  wheat  and  corn,  1791-1846 

[Source:  U.  S.  Commerce  and  Navigation  Reports.  Also  found  in  Senate  Report,  53d  Congress, 

2d  Session,  1893-94,  vol.  iv,  part  u,  pp.  12,  14.] 


Year. 

Wheat  a 
(1000  bu.). 

Corn  b 
(1000  bu.). 

Year. 

1 

Wheat a 
(1000  bu.). 

Corn  b 
(1000  bu.). 

Year. 

Wheat  a 
(1000  bu.). 

Corn  b 
(1000  bu.). 

1791 

3,807 

1,995 

l8lO 

3,919 

1,401 

1829 

3,772 

i,593 

1792 

4,564 

2,176 

1,386 

l8ll 

6,719 

3,38l 

1830 

5,569 

1,025 

1793 

6,286 

l8l2 

6,550 

2,403 

1831 

8,538 

1,402 

1794 

4,504 

1,702 

1813 

5,963 

1,721 

1832 

3,980 

1,038 

1795 

3,234 

2,345 

1814 

870 

167 

1833 

4,333 

1,024 

1796 

3,295 

i,79i 

1815 

3,900 

1,120 

1834 

3,796 

902 

1797 

2,336 

1,096 

1816 

3,333 

1,434 

1835 

3,555 

1,423 

1798 

2,569 

1,460 

1817 

6,753 

815 

1836 

2,276 

688 

1799 

2,347 

1,465 

l8l8 

5,406 

2,155 

1837 

i,452 

789 

1800 

2,966 

2,081 

1819 

3,46o 

1,628 

1838 

2,023 

860 

l8oi 

5,201 

2,819 

1820 

5,319 

1,119 

1839 

4,251 

825 

1802 

5,483 

1,938 

1821 

4,778 

1,134 

1840 

10,260 

i,399 

1803 

6,590 

2,614 

1822 

3,730 

1,102 

1841 

7,690 

1,465 

1804 

3,772 

2,390 

1823 

3,409 

1,315 

1842 

6,594 

i,437 

1805 

3,517 

1,326 

1824 

4,506 

1,390 

1843° 

5,464 

1,827 

1806 

3,609 

1,498 

1825 

3,68i 

1,619 

1844 

7,033 

1,817 

1807 

6,797 

1,158 

1826 

3,905 

1,140 

1845 

5,768 

1,916 

1808 

1,274 

373 

1827 

3-930 

1,503 

1846 

11,916 

3,021 

1809 

4,202 

75i 

1828 

3,883 

1,403 

a  Including  flour,  equivalent;  4 H  bus.  wheat=i96  lbs.  flour. 

b  Including  cornmeal  equivalent;  4  bus.  ccrn=i  bbl.  cornmeal;  1  bu.  cornmeal=  1.142857  or 
1  1-7  bu.  corn. 

c  Official  figures  covering  only  9  months  have  been  increased  by  one-third. 


493 


494 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


Table  67. — Exports  of  animal  products. 

[Source:  U.  S.  Commerce  and  Navigation  Reports.  Also  found  in  Senate  Report,  53d  Congress, 

2d  Session,  1893-94,  vol.  iv,  part  11,  pp.  36,  38,  4 2.] 


Year. 

Pork,  hams, 
bacon  and 
lard 

(1000  lbs.) 

Beef  and 
tallow 
(1000  lbs.) 

Butter  and 
cheese 
(1000  lbs.) 

Year. 

Pork,  hams, 
bacon  and 
lard 

(1000  lbs.) 

Beef  and 
tallow 
(1000  lbs.) 

Butter  and 
cheese 
(1000  lbs.) 

1791 

6,145 

12,791 

1,054 

1819 

8,513 

7,029 

2,060 

1792 

8,720 

15,020 

785 

1820 

45,071 

10,724 

2,292 

1793 

8,831 

15,331 

66l 

1821 

18,933 

13,459 

1,835 

1794 

12,139 

20,360 

2,773 

1822 

18,951 

19,586 

1,872 

1/95 

20,908 

19,235 

3,933 

1823 

l8,8lO 

13,019 

1,763 

1796 

17,998 

18,692 

4,349 

1824 

19,908 

I3,3H 

2,319 

1797 

9,841 

10,388 

2,512 

1825 

24,521 

18,138 

2,672 

1798 

8,605 

17,901 

2,497 

1826 

26,867 

15,001 

1,912 

1799 

13,317 

18,284 

2,479 

1827 

23,555 

18,439 

1,790 

1800 

13,900 

15,024 

2,736 

1828 

21,098 

13,750 

1,873 

l80I 

18,567 

15,103 

4,505 

18:29 

21,368 

I0,7H 

1,886 

1802 

19,194 

1 2,337 

3,694 

1830 

17,285 

9,902 

1,588 

1803 

23,059 

15,646 

3,681 

1831 

18,694 

12,834 

2,860 

1804 

26,776 

27,015 

3,776 

1832 

27,293 

11,724 

2,894 

1805 

13,797 

23,120 

2,499 

1833 

30,6l6 

13,541 

2,559 

1806 

10,137 

23,538 

2,582 

1834 

27,109 

10,007 

1,905 

1807 

10,982 

16,895 

2,843 

1835 

24,495 

8,097 

i,572 

1808 

3,939 

4,025 

1,211 

1836 

12,402 

10,489 

848 

1809 

10,984 

5,7i6 

1,955 

1837 

12,271 

5,784 

693 

l8lO 

10,026 

9,551 

2,362 

1838 

14,676 

5,06l 

1,160 

l8ll 

10,668 

15,393 

2,823 

1839 

17,430 

3,356 

944 

l8l2 

6,895 

8,568 

2,322 

r?40 

22,318 

4,210 

1,901 

1813 

5,159 

8,749 

696 

1841 

40,050 

12,287 

5,534 

1814 

1,460 

4,062 

370 

1842 

58,628 

16,754 

4.512 

1815 

3,556 

2,664 

i,3i3 

1843* 

57,358 

20,069 

9T3i 

1816 

5,474 

6,670 

i,354 

1844 

61,959 

31,210 

io,595 

1817 

4,160 

7,595 

1,065 

1845 

55T02 

30,330 

11,529 

I8l8 

5,477 

7,390 

1,192 

1846 

62,934 

40.280 

12,112 

a  Official  figures  covering  only  9  months  have  been  increased  by  one-third. 


Table  68. — Imports  of  animal  products,  1822  to  1846. 

[Source:  U.  S.  Commerce  and  Navigation  Reports.] 


Year. 

Meat  prod- 

Butter  and 

Hides  and 

Year. 

Meat 

prod- 

Butter  and 

Hides  and 

uctsa  (lbs.). 

cheese  (lbs.). 

skins,  value. 

ucts  a 

(lbs.). 

cheese  (lbs.). 

skins,  value. 

l8  22 

3,476,372 

50,546 

$2,041,463 

1823 

1,156,983 

86,825 

2,084,082 

1824 

296,307 

44,6lO 

2,142,168 

1825 

706,195 

32,381 

2,221,868 

2,825,526 

1826 

1,008,921 

46,141 

1827 

1,347,466 

40,915 

1,480,349 

1828 

2,158,038 

102,482 

1,804,202 

1829 

1,455,197 

179,530 

2,252,609 

1830 

668,948 

87,338 

2,409.850 

1831 

519,124 

60,485 

3,057,543 

1832 

34T785 

202,375 

4,680,128 

1833 

1,740.389 

240,073 

3,588,819 

1834 

2,33TOI9 

197,285 

3,296,688 

1835 

1,759,829 

147,552 

$3,369,888 

1836 

589,351 

359,615 

3,511,463 

1837 

732,506 

272,854 

3,3  06,681 

1838 

2,531,847 

137,523 

2,036,629 

1839 

i,6i4,572 

269,521 

3,158,029 

1840 

1841 

1842 
i843b 

1844 

1,184,194 

307,012 

254,739 

53T3i8 

292,753 

226,286 

121,065 

82,864 

46,113 

58,800 

2,756,214 

3,457,248 

4,067,816 

3,493,o87 

1845 

227,515 

68,387 

1846 

200,418 

56,501 

a  Beef,  pork,  lard,  tallow,  and  bacon. 

b  Official  figures  covering  only  9  months  have  been  increased  by  one-third. 


MISCELLANEOUS  STATISTICS 


495 


Table  69. — W  ages  of  farm  labor  and  prices  of  farm  products,  1801  to  1836. 


:  The  wage  data  are  from  Wright’s  Wages  and  Prices,  1752-1860,  in  Mass.  Bureau  of 
[  Labor,  16th  Annual  Report  (1885),  parts  ni  and  iv,  p.  317.  The  index  number  of 
ot  farm  products  is  that  quoted  and  described  in  Table  65.  See  footnote,  p.  438.] 


prices 


[Sources 
Statistics  oi 


Year. 

w 

Wages 
per  day  of 
'  agricultural 
labor.  * 

Index  No. 
of  wages.  b 

Index  No. 
of  prices 
of  farm 
products.  b 

Year. 

Wages 
per  day  of 
agricultural 
labor.  a 

Index  No. 
of  wages.  b 

Index  No. 
of  prices 
of  farm 
products.  b 

l8oi 

•577 

77.6 

183.8 

1819 

•533 

71.6 

137.0 

1802 

.622 

83.6 

130.7 

1820 

.750 

100.8 

IO9.5 

1803 

.517 

69-5 

128.2 

1821 

.704 

94.6 

94-7 

1804 

.806 

108.3 

1398 

1822 

.771 

IO3.6 

107.0 

1805 

•958 

128.8 

159-7 

1823 

.940 

126.3 

104.0 

1806 

•932 

125.3 

155-4 

1824 

•  •  •  • 

1807 

.692 

93-0 

146.7 

1825 

.744 

100.0 

100.0 

1808 

.865 

116.3 

125.2 

1826 

.617 

82.9 

106.7 

1809 

•540 

72.6 

132.9 

1827 

.809 

I08.7 

99.6 

l8lO 

.936 

125.8 

153-2 

1828 

•775 

IO4.2 

89.7 

l8ll 

•592 

796 

1474 

1829 

•  •  •  • 

•  •  •  • 

90.2 

l8l2 

.854 

114.8 

136.9 

1830 

•  •  •  • 

•  •  •  • 

91.0 

1813 

.958 

128.8 

172.8 

1831 

.875 

118.3 

99.6 

1814 

.699 

94.0 

212.4 

1832 

•  •  •  • 

•  •  •  • 

104.7 

1815 

.868 

116.7 

170. 1 

1833 

•  •  •  • 

•  •  •  • 

110.6 

1816 

•752 

IOI.O 

1 80. 1 

1834 

•  •  •  • 

•  •  •  • 

97.2 

1817 

.827 

1 1 1.2 

199.9 

1835 

.875 

Il8.3 

116.2 

1818 

1.490 

200.3 

179-5 

1836 

117.6 

136.5 

a  Without  board. 
b  1825  =  100. 


Table  70. — Wool  prices  per  pound  in  New  York,  1816  to  1846. 

[Sources:  New  York  Shipping  and  Commercial  List,  1816-1824;  for  the  years  1824-1846,  quotations 
of  Mauger  &  Avery,  printed  in  Wright,  Wool  Growing  and  the  Tariff,  p.  347.] 


Year  and 
month. 

Merino. 

Half 

blood. 

Common. 

Year  and 
month. 

Merino. 

Half 

blood. 

Common. 

cts. 

cts. 

cts. 

cts. 

ct*s. 

cts . 

1816  Jan.  . . . 

106 

56 

50 

1820  July  ... 

67 

37 

30 

Apr.  . . . 

100 

50 

40 

Oct.  .  .  . 

67 

37 

30 

July  ... 

100 

50 

40 

1821  Jan.  . . . 

67 

37 

30 

Oct.  . . . 

68 

47 

40 

Apr.  . . . 

67 

42 

30 

1817  Jan.  . . . 

68 

47 

37 

July  ... 

57 

35 

32 

Apr.  . . . 

68 

47 

37 

Oct  . . . 

72 

42 

40 

July  ... 

85 

50 

37 

1822  Jan.  . . . 

72 

42 

40 

Oct.  . . . 

80 

50 

32 

Apr.  . . . 

72 

42 

40 

1818  Jan.  . . . 

77 

45 

32 

July  ... 

65 

45 

37 

Apr.  . . . 

77 

45 

32 

Oct.  . . . 

62 

45 

37 

July  ... 

80 

45 

32 

1823  Jan.  ... 

62 

45 

37 

Oct.  . . . 

80 

45 

40 

Apr.  . . . 

62 

45 

35 

1819  Jan.  . . . 

80 

45 

40 

July  ... 

62 

45 

35 

Apr.  . . . 

80 

45 

40 

Oct.  . . . 

62 

45 

35 

July  ... 

80 

45 

40 

1824  Jan.  . . . 

52 

37 

32 

Oct.  . . . 

62 

42 

35 

Apr.  . . . 

52 

37 

32 

1820  Jan.  . 

77 

42 

40 

July  ... 

58 

42 

32 

Apr.  . . . 

77 

42 

40 

Oct.  . . . 

58 

42 

32 

496 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


Table  70. — Wool  prices  per  pound  in  New  York,  1816  to  1846. — Continued. 


Year  and 
month. 

Fine. 

Medium. 

Coarse. 

Year  and 
month. 

Fine. 

Medium. 

Coarse. 

cts. 

cts. 

cts. 

cts. 

cts. 

cts. 

1824“  Jan. 

•  •  • 

68 

53 

40 

1835  July 

•  •  • 

63 

56 

42 

Apr. 

•  •  • 

70 

46 

31 

Oct. 

•  •  • 

65 

60 

45 

July 

•  •  • 

55 

40 

30 

1836  Jan. 

•  •  • 

65 

60 

45 

Oct. 

•  •  • 

60 

40 

30 

Apr. 

•  •  • 

68 

62 

47 

1825  Jan. 

•  •  • 

60 

43 

32 

July 

•  •  • 

70 

60 

50 

Apr. 

•  •  • 

60 

42 

33 

Oct. 

•  •  • 

70 

60 

50 

July 

•  •  • 

50 

4i 

32 

1837  Jan. 

•  •  • 

72 

63 

48 

Oct. 

•  •  • 

50 

42 

36 

Apr. 

•  •  • 

68 

56 

46 

1826  Jan. 

•  •  • 

55 

43 

38 

July 

•  •  • 

52 

52 

36 

Apr. 

.  .  . 

52 

46 

4i 

Oct. 

•  •  • 

49 

40 

3i 

July 

•  •  • 

37 

30 

26 

1838  Jan. 

•  •  • 

50 

42 

35 

Oct. 

•  •  • 

43 

37 

32 

Apr. 

•  •  • 

50 

42 

35 

1827  Jan. 

•  •  • 

36 

32 

28 

July 

•  •  • 

46 

36 

30 

Apr. 

♦  ’  • 

45 

34 

30 

Oct. 

•  •  • 

56 

48 

37 

July 

• 

37 

3i 

25 

1839  Jan. 

•  •  • 

56 

48 

38 

Oct. 

•  •  • 

43 

32 

25 

Apr. 

•  •  • 

56 

48 

38 

1828  Jan. 

•  •  • 

42 

30 

25 

July 

•  •  • 

57 

48 

40 

Apr. 

•  •  • 

44 

36 

28 

Oct. 

•  •  • 

60 

55 

44 

July 

•  •  • 

48 

38 

33 

1840  Jan. 

•  •  • 

50 

45 

38 

Oct. 

•  •  • 

48 

40 

32 

Apr. 

... 

49 

43 

36 

1829  Jan. 

•  •  • 

54 

45 

35 

July 

•  •  • 

45 

39 

33 

Apr. 

•  •  • 

45 

35 

32 

Oct. 

•  •  • 

46 

38 

33 

July 

•  •  • 

46 

36 

32 

1841  Jan. 

•  •  • 

52 

45 

35 

Oct. 

•  •  . 

37 

30 

27 

Apr. 

•  •  • 

53 

46 

37 

1830  Jan. 

•  •  • 

40 

35 

30 

July 

•  •  • 

50 

44 

34 

Apr. 

•  •  • 

50 

38 

32 

Oct. 

•  •  • 

48 

42 

33 

July 

•  •  • 

60 

50 

40 

1842  Jan. 

•  •  • 

48 

42 

35 

Oct. 

•  •  • 

70 

60 

48 

Apr. 

•  •  • 

46 

40 

32 

1831  Jan. 

•  •  • 

70 

60 

48 

July 

•  •  • 

43 

37 

30 

Apr. 

•  •  • 

70 

60 

50 

Oct. 

38 

3i 

25 

July 

•  •  • 

75 

65 

60 

1843  Jan. 

•  •  • 

35 

30 

25 

Oct. 

•  •  • 

70 

60 

50 

Apr. 

•  •  • 

33 

28 

25 

1832  Jan. 

•  •  • 

65 

55 

44 

July 

•  •  • 

35 

30 

26 

Apr. 

•  .  . 

60 

52 

42 

Oct. 

•  •  • 

36 

32 

26 

July 

50 

42 

30 

1844  Jan. 

... 

37 

30 

26 

Oct. 

•  •  . 

50 

40 

30 

Apr. 

•  •  • 

43 

36 

30 

1833  Jan. 

•  •  • 

55 

4i 

33 

July 

•  •  • 

45 

37 

32 

Apr. 

•  •  • 

63 

53 

38 

Oct. 

•  •  • 

50 

40 

33 

July 

•  •  • 

61 

54 

40 

1845  Jan. 

•  •  • 

47 

40 

3i 

Oct. 

•  •  • 

65 

55 

45 

Apr. 

•  •  • 

45 

38 

32 

1834  Jan. 

•  •  • 

70 

60 

48 

July 

•  •  • 

40 

36 

30 

Apr. 

•  •  • 

67 

56 

44 

Oct. 

•  •  • 

38 

35 

28 

July 

•  •  • 

60 

50 

40 

1846  Jan. 

•  •  • 

40 

35 

30 

Oct. 

•  •  • 

62 

50 

40 

Apr. 

•  •  • 

38 

33 

28 

1835  Jan. 

•  •  • 

63 

50 

40 

July 

•  •  • 

38 

32 

2  7 

Apr. 

65 

60 

45 

Oct. 

. . . 

36 

30 

22 

a  The  grades  quoted  by  Mauger  &  Avery  were  fine,  medium  and  coarse. 


MISCELLANEOUS  STATISTICS 


497 


Table  71. — Imports  of  wool,  1822  to  1846. 

[Sources:  U.  S.  Commerce  and  Navigation  Reports;  and  Wright,  Wool  Growing  and  the  Tariff, 

340  for  the  years  1822-28.] 


Year. 


1822 

1823 

1824 

1825 

1826 

1827 

1828 

1829 

1830 

1831 

1832 

1833 

1834 


Total  imports 
(1000  lbs.). 

Coarse 
Wool.  a 

Fine 

W ool.  b 

Year. 

Total  imports 
(1000  lbs.). 

Coarse 
Wool.  a 

Fine 
Wool.  b 

L7I5 

1835 

7,290 

5,544 

L747 

L673 

1836 

12,688 

n,033 

1,655 

1,300 

1837 

10,408 

9,48o 

928 

2,147 

1838 

6,968 

6,551 

417 

2,638 

1839 

7,925 

7,399 

527 

3,331 

1840 

9,899 

9,304 

595 

2,453 

1841 

15,006 

14,410 

597 

1,494 

1842 

11,421 

10,637 

784 

670 

1843° 

4,758 

4,512 

246 

5,623 

1844 

14,008 

13,809 

200 

4,043 

1845 

23,833 

23,382 

45i 

950 

950 

1846 

16,558 

16,428 

130 

591 

591 

n  Value  not  exceeding  8  cents  per  lb.;  after  1842,  7  cents. 
b  Value  exceeding  8  cents  per  lb.;  after  1842,  7  cents. 

c  Official  figures  covering  only  9  months  have  been  increased  by  one-third. 


Table  72. — Price  of  Hour,  1800  to  1855. 

[Average  annual  export  price  at  New  York,  from  Klippart,  The  Wheat  Plant,  p.  328.] 


Year. 

Average 
annual  price. 

Year. 

Average 
annual  price 

Year. 

Average 
annual  price. 

Year. 

Average 
annual  price. 

l800 

$10.00 

1814 

$14.50 

1828 

$5.50 

1842 

$6.00 

l80I 

13-00 

1815 

9.25 

1829 

5-oo 

1843 

4.50 

1802 

9.00 

1816 

7-37 

1830 

7.25 

1844 

4-75 

1803 

7.00 

1817 

14-75 

1831 

5.62 

1845 

4.51 

1804 

7-75 

l8l8 

10.25 

1832 

5.87 

1846 

5.18 

1805 

13.00 

1819 

8.00 

1833 

5.50 

1847 

5-95 

1806 

7.50 

1820 

5-37 

1834 

5.50 

1848 

6.22 

1807 

8.25 

1821 

4.25 

1835 

6.00 

1849 

5-35 

1808 

6.00 

1822 

7.00 

1836 

7-50 

1850 

5.00 

1809 

7-50 

1823 

7-75 

1837 

10.25 

1851 

4-77 

l8lO 

8.25 

1824 

6.62 

1838 

9.50 

1852 

4.24 

l8ll 

10.50 

1825 

5-37 

1839 

6.75 

1853 

5.60 

l8l2 

10.75 

1826 

5-25 

1840 

5-37 

1854 

7.88 

1813 

1300 

1827 

8.00 

1841 

5-20 

1855 

10.10 

33 


498 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


Table  73. — Imports  of  wheat,  1824  to  1846. 

[Source:  U.  S.  Commerce  and  Navigation  Reports.] 


Year. 

Wheat. 

Flour. 

Flour  Equiv. 
of  wheat.  a 

Total  wheat. 

bu. 

cwt. 

bu. 

bu. 

1824 

488 

370 

849-5 

1,337-5 

1825 

1,065 

1 18 

270.9 

1,335-9 

1826 

3,448 

33 

75-8 

3, 523.8 

1827 

1,064 

47 

107.9 

1,171.9 

1828 

852 

6 

13-8 

865.8 

1829 

263 

151 

346.7 

609.7 

1830 

422 

201 

461.5 

883.5 

1831 

620 

5 

II.5 

631-5 

1832 

I,l68 

9 

20.7 

1,188.7 

1833 

1,600 

37 

84.9 

1,684.9 

1834 

1,225 

32 

73-5 

1,298.5 

1835 

238,769 

28,483 

65,394.6 

304,163.6 

1836 

583,898 

66,731 

153,208.9 

737,106.9 

1837 

3, 921,259 

30,709 

70,5054 

3,991,764.4 

1838 

894,536 

12,731 

29,229.3 

923,765.3 

1839 

32,884 

7,348 

16,870.4 

49,7544 

1840 

593 

329 

755-4 

1,348.4 

1841 

632 

86 

197.4 

829.4 

1842 

4,082 

28 

64.3 

4,146.3 

l843b 

16,107 

75 

172.2 

16,279.2 

1844 

446 

243 

557.9 

1,003.9 

184S 

281 

14 

32.1 

3I3-I 

1846 

512 

62 

142.3 

6513 

a  Converted  at  rate  of  bushels  of  wheat  to  196  pounds  of  flour. 
b  Official  figures  covering  only  9  months  have  been  increased  by  one-third. 


Table  74— Hops:  Quantity  inspected  and  prices  in  Massachusetts,  1806  to  1840. 

[From  4th  Report,  Agric.  of  Mass.  (1841),  pp.  490-491.] 


Year. 

Inspections. 

Price  per 
lb. 

Year. 

Inspections. 

Price  per 
lb. 

Year. 

Inspections. 

Price  per 
lb. 

lbs. 

cts. 

lbs. 

cts. 

lbs. 

cts. 

1806 

278,221 

15 

1818 

616,366 

14 

1830 

566,489 

II 

1807 

369,496 

II 

1819 

656,902 

5 

1831 

505,251 

ioi 

1808 

322,976 

10 

1820 

782,663 

62 

1832 

400,543 

23  3 

1809 

280,063 

10 

1821 

561,063 

7* 

1833 

698,724 

l6 

l8lO 

299,500 

2  7 

1822 

548,709 

ioi 

1834 

722,596 

14 

l8ll 

416,050 

7i 

1823 

618,444 

20 

1835 

695,800 

l8l2 

322,913 

12$ 

1824 

575,030 

10* 

1836 

847,590 

7* 

1813 

243,242 

22 

1825 

621,241 

15 

1837 

623,648 

6 

1814 

179,640 

25 

1826 

409,007 

15 

1838 

359,992 

15 

1815 

331,673 

30 

1827 

752,140 

7 

1839 

233,461 

15 

1816 

287,374 

32 

1828 

662,334 

6 

1840 

279,833 

30 

1817 

729,862 

34 

1829 

541,632 

8* 

MISCELLANEOUS  STATISTICS 


499 


Table  75. — Urban  concentration,  1840. 


[Towns  and  cities  of  over  8,000  population.  Source:  U.  S.  Census,  1840.] 


State  and  town  or  city. 

Popula¬ 

tion. 

| 

State  and  town  or  city. 

Popula¬ 

tion. 

Maine : 

Bangor  . 

8,627 

New  Jersey : 

Newark  . 

17,290 

Portland  . 

15,218 

Pennsylvania : 

Massachusetts : 

Philadelphia  and  Suburbs 

205,850 

Roxbury  . 

9,089 

93,383 

Lancaster  . 

8,417 

8,410 

Boston  . 

Reading  . 

Charlestown  . 

11,484 

Alleghany  . 

10,089 

Cambridge  . 

8,409 

Pittsburgh  . 

21,115 

Lowell  . 

20,796 

Delaware : 

Lynn  . 

9,367 

Wilmington  . 

8,367 

Nantucket  . 

9,012 

Ohio : 

New  Bedford  . 

12,087 

Cincinnati  . 

46,338 

Salem  . 

15,082 

Missouri : 

Springfield  . 

10,985 

St.  Louis  . 

16,469 

Rhode  Island : 

Newport  . 

8,333 

Maryland : 

Baltimore  . 

102,313 

Providence  . 

23,171 

Kentucky : 

Smithfield  . 

9,534 

Louisville  . 

21,210 

Connecticut : 

Hartford  . 

9,468 

Virginia : 

Norfolk  . 

10,920 

New  Haven  . 

12,923 

Petersburg  . 

11,136 

20,153 

New  York : 

Richmond  . 

Albany  . 

33,721 

South  Carolina : 

Buffalo  . 

18,213 

Charleston  . 

29,26l 

Rochester  . 

20,191 

Georgia : 

Troy  . 

19,334 

Savannah  . 

11,214 

Utica  . 

12,782 

36,233 

Alabama : 

Brooklyn  . 

Mobile  . 

12,672 

Fishkill  . ' 

10,437 

Michigan : 

Newburgh  . 

8,933 

Detroit  . 

9,102 

New  York  . 

312,710 

District  of  Columbia : 

Poughkeepsie  . 

10,006 

Alexandria  . 

8,459 

Washington  . 

23,364 

500 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


Table  76. — Prices  of  wheat  ( winter )  per  bushel,  at  New  York,  1840  to  i860. 

[Source:  Aldrich  Report  (1893),  part  2,  p.  63.] 


Year  and  month. 

Price. 

Year  and  month. 

JPrice. 

Year  and  month. 

Price. 

1840  Jan . 

$1,230 

1847  Jan . 

$1,130 

1854  Jan . 

$1,900 

Apr . 

1 .  120 

Apr . 

1-575 

Apr . 

2.  110 

July  . 

I.O9O 

July  . 

1-575 

July  . 

2.250 

Oct . 

I  .030 

Oct . 

1.235 

Oct . 

1.725 

1841  Jan . 

1-045 

1848  Jan . 

1.360 

1855  Jan . 

2.380 

Apr . 

0.975 

Apr . 

1 .460 

Apr . 

2 . 500 

July  . 

1-275 

July  . 

1 .210 

July  . 

2.525 

Oct . 

1.425 

Oct . 

1 . 270 

Oc.t . 

I  800 

1842  Jan . 

1.250 

1849  Jan . 

1.260 

1856  Jan . 

1.930 

Apr . 

1.255 

Apr . 

1 .210 

Apr . 

I  850 

July  . 

1.270 

July  . 

1.240 

July  . 

1-675 

Oct . 

0.910 

Oct . 

1 .210 

Oct  . 

1 .  575 

1843  Jan . 

0.925 

1850  Jan . 

1.265 

1857  Jan . 

1.590 

Apr . 

1-075 

Apr . 

1-275 

Apr . 

I.650 

July  . 

1. 190 

July  . 

1.500 

July  . 

1.950 

Oct . 

0.955 

Oct . 

1 . 150 

Oct . 

1 . 140 

1844  Jan . 

1.020 

1851  Jan . 

1. 215 

1858  Jan . 

1.200 

Apr . 

1-045 

Apr . 

1. 125 

Apr . 

I .  igO 

July  . 

0.900 

July  . 

1.080 

July  . 

I.II5 

Oct . 

0.915 

Oct . 

0.945 

Oct . 

I  165 

1845  Jan . 

0.955 

1852  Jan . 

1.115 

1859  Jan . 

1.300 

Apr . 

1. 015 

Apr . 

1 . 100 

Apr . 

1-530 

July  . 

1.030 

July  . 

1. 125 

July  . 

I.650 

Oct . 

0.975 

Oct . 

1 . 090 

Oct . 

I  350 

1846  Jan . 

1.300 

1853  Jan . 

1.320 

i860  Jan . 

1 .410 

Apr . 

1 . 180 

Apr . 

1 . 230 

Apr . 

1 .450 

July  . 

0.920 

July  . 

1.290 

July  . 

1 .410 

Oct . 

1.085 

Oct . 

1.590 

Oct . 

1.265 

Table  77. — Prices  of  wheat  (No.  2  winter )  per  bushel,  at  Chicago,  1840  to  i860. 

[Source:  Aldrich  Report  (1893),  part  2,  p.  61.] 


Year  and  month. 

Price. 

Year  and  month. 

Price. 

1840  Apr . 

$0-595 

1848  July  . 

$0,975 

July  . 

-595 

Oct . 

.625 

Oct . 

.850 

1849  Jan . 

.685 

1841  Jan . 

•  595 

Apr . 

1. 125 

Apr . 

.520 

July  . 

.705 

July  . 

.650 

Oct . 

.760 

1842  Oct . 

.525 

1850  Jan . 

-775 

1843  Jan . 

•465 

Apr . 

-775 

Apr . 

•5i5 

July  . 

I  .  100 

July  . 

.805 

Oct . 

.700 

1844  Apr . 

.650 

1851  Jan . 

•675 

July  . 

.630 

Oct . 

.625 

Oct . 

.650 

1852  Jan . 

•575 

1845  Jan . 

.710 

Apr . 

.650 

Apr . 

.780 

July  . 

.720 

1846  July  . 

•515 

Oct . 

.660 

Oct . 

.600 

1853  Jan . 

.820 

1847  Jan . 

.560 

Apr . 

•  750 

Apr . 

.675 

July  . 

.840 

July  . 

-575 

Oct . 

1.065 

Oct . 

•  730 

1854  Jan . 

1 .105 

1848  Jan . 

.825 

Apr . 

1. 160 

Apr . 

.875 

July  . 

Oct . 

1 -175 
1-350 

Year  and  month. 


1855  Jan. 
Apr. 
July 
Oct. 

1856  Jan. 
Apr. 
July 
Oct. 

1857  Jan. 
Apr. 
July 
Oct. 

1858  Jan. 
Apr. 
Oct. 

1859  Jan. 
Apr. 
July 
Oct. 

1860  Jan. 
Apr. 
July 
Oct. 


Price. 


$1,260 
1-525 
1-725 
1.500 
1.450 
1.500 
I.  105 
I  .210 
I.  105 
I.  125 
1.500 
I  •  075 
.700 
•750 
1-035 
I.065 
I-3I5 
1-255 
.870 
1.090 
1. 150 
1. 150 
1 .000 


MISCELLANEOUS  STATISTICS 


501 


Table  78. — Prices  of  beeves  ( good  to  prime,  live  weight )  per  100  pounds, 

at  New  York,  1840-1860. 


[Source:  Aldrich  Report  (1893),  part  2 ,  p.  25.] 


Year  and  month. 

Price. 

Year  and  month. 

Price. 

Year  and  month. 

Price. 

1840  Jan . 

$3.64 

1847  Jan . 

$3-78 

1854  Jan . 

$5-32 

Apr . 

3-50 

Apr . 

4.20 

Apr . 

6.l6 

July  . 

4.20 

July  . 

4.48 

July  . 

5-04 

Oct . 

3.50 

4.20 

Oct . 

4 . 06 

Oct 

5.18 

5-88 

1841  Jan . 

1848  Jan . 

4.48 

1855  Jan . 

Apr . 

4-34 

Apr . 

4.62 

Apr . 

7.00 

July  . 

3-50 

July  . 

4.06 

July  . 

5-88 

Oct . 

3.22 

Oct . 

3.22 

Oct 

e .  60 

1842  Jan . 

3-00 

1849  Jan . 

4.76 

1856  Jan . 

6. 16 

Apr . 

3-64 

Apr . 

5-32 

Apr . 

6.44 

July  . 

3.22 

July  . 

4.48 

July  . 

5-32 

Oct . 

3.08 

Oct . 

4-32 

4.48 

Oct  . 

c.  88 

1843  Jan . 

3-36 

1850  Jan . 

1857  Jan . 

6.72 

Apr . 

3.08 

Apr . 

4.48 

Apr . 

6.16 

July  . 

3-30 

July  . 

4.48 

July  . 

5-88 

Oct . 

3-36 
3-2 4 
3-50 

Oct . 

4.20 

Oct 

6  16 

1844  Jan . 

Apr . 

1851  Jan . 

Apr . 

4.20 

5-04 

1858  Jan . 

Apr . 

5- 60 
5-32 

July  . 

3- 08 

July  . 

4.48 

July  . 

4.20 

Oct . 

3.08 

Oct.  . 

4.06 

Oct  . 

5-04 

5-46 

1845  Jan . 

3-30 

1852  Jan . 

4.76 

1859  Jan . 

Apr . 

3-64 

Apr . 

5.60 

Apr . 

6.16 

July  . 

3-64 

July  . 

4.48 

July  . 

6.16 

Oct . 

3.08 

Oct . 

4.76 

5-04 

Oct  . 

5-32 

5.60 

1846  Jan . 

3.36 

1853  Jan . 

i860  Jan . 

Apr . 

4.20 

Apr . 

5- 60 

Apr . 

5-88 

July  . 

3.22 

July  . 

5.60 

July  . 

5-04 

Oct . 

3.78 

Oct . 

5- 60 

Oct . 

5-32 

Table  79. — Prices  of  beeves  ( good  to  choice,  live  weight )  per  100  pounds, 

at  Cincinnati,  1843  to  i860. 

[Source:  Aldrich  Report  (1893),  part  2,  p.  24.] 


Year  and  month. 

Price. 

1843  July  . 

$2-75 

Oct . 

2.25 

1844  Apr . 

3.25 

July  . 

2-75 

1845  Jan . 

3-00 

July  . 

3-75 

Oct . 

3-50 

1846  Jan . 

3-25 

Apr . 

3.15 

July  . 

3-75 

Oct . 

3.50 

1847  Jan . 

3.50 

Apr . 

4.40 

July  . 

4-50 

Oct . 

4-25 

1848  Jan . 

3.15 

Apr . 

4-25 

July  . 

4-25 

1849  Jan . 

4-50 

Apr . 

4-15 

1850  Jan . 

4.00 

Year  and  month. 

Price. 

1850  Apr . 

$5-25 

Oct . 

3-75 

1851  Jan . 

4-75 

Apr . 

5-75 

July  . 

5.00 

Oct . 

5-25 

1852  Jan . 

4-75 

Apr . 

6.25 

July  . 

5-50 

Oct . 

5-25 

1853  Jan . 

6.50 

Apr . 

6.50 

July  . 

7.00 

Oct . 

4-35 

1854  Jan . 

4.50 

Apr . 

7.50 

July  . 

6. 10 

Oct . 

5-25 

1855  Jan . 

6.25 

Apr . 

9-50 

July  . 

7.25 

Year  and  month. 

Price. 

1855  Oct . 

$4.00 

1856  Jan . 

3-75 

Apr . 

3-50 

July  . 

3.87 

Oct . 

3-75 

1857  Jan . 

4.00 

Apr . 

5.25 

July  . 

5.00 

Oct . 

4.00 

1858  Jan . 

4.00 

Apr . 

4.00 

July  . 

3-75 

Oct . 

3.25 

1859  Jan . 

4.25 

Apr . 

5-75 

July  . 

5.00 

Oct . 

3-50 

i860  Jan . 

3-75 

Apr . 

4-25 

July  . 

3-25 

Oct . 

3-25 

502 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


Table  8o. — Prices  of  butter  per  pound,  at  Boston,  1840-1860. 

[Source:  Aldrich  Report  (1893),  part  2,  p.  73.] 


Year  and  month. 

Price. 

Year  and  month. 

Price. 

Year  and  month. 

1 

Price. 

1840  Jan . 

$0. 180 

1847  Jan . 

$0 . 180 

1854  Jan . 

$0,170 

Apr . 

.140 

Apr . 

.185 

Apr . 

.210 

July  . 

.  l6o 

July  . 

.  170 

July  . 

.  180 

Oct . 

.  l6o 

Oct . 

.200 

Oct . 

.255 

1841  Jan . 

.  l6o 

1848  Jan . 

.  170 

i8ss  Tan . 

•  “JJ 

.24^ 

Apr . 

•1/5 

Apr . 

.  190 

Apr . 

•  ^  r  J 

•275 

July  . 

.175 

July  . 

.  l6o 

July  . 

.190 

Oct . 

.  175 

Oct . 

.  170 

Oct . 

.2IS 

1842  Jan . 

•  175 

1849  Jan . 

.  l8o 

i8s6  Tan . 

.  —  X  J 

.2^ 

Apr . 

•175 

Apr . 

.  170 

Apr . 

.215 

July  . 

•175 

July  . 

.  170 

July  . 

.165 

Oct . 

.  180 

Oct . 

.  190 

Oct . 

.  220 

1843  Jan . 

.150 

1850  Jan . 

.  170 

1857  Jan . 

.235 

Apr . 

.  ISO 

Apr . 

.  170 

Apr  . 

.2SS 

July  . 

.  140 

Julv  . 

.  l60 

July  . 

.215 

Oct . 

.  ISO 

Oct . 

.  170 

Oct  . 

.220 

1844  Jan . 

.150 

1851  Jan . 

•  175 

1858  Jan . 

.  190 

Apr . 

•  185 

Apr . 

.  I7S 

Apr  . 

250 

July  . 

.185 

July  . 

•155 

July  . 

•175 

Oct . 

•  185 

Oct . 

.  16s 

Oct  .... 

190 

1845  Jan . 

.150 

1852  Jan . 

.190 

1859  Jan . 

•235 

Apr . 

.150 

Apr . 

•  245 

Apr . 

•215 

July  . 

.  170 

July  . 

.  170 

July  . 

.  l80 

Oct . 

.  170 

Oct . 

.24s 

Oct 

.  20S 

1846  Jan . 

.195 

1853  Jan . 

.270 

i860  Jan . 

.210 

Apr . 

.150 

Apr . 

.210 

Apr . 

.  170 

July  . 

.150 

July  . 

.170 

July  . 

.  170 

Oct . 

.165 

Oct . 

.200 

Oct . 

.200 

Table  81. — Prices  of  cheese  per  pound,  at  Boston,  1840  to  i860. 
[Source:  Aldrich  Report  (1893),  part  2,  p.  74.] 


Year  and  month. 

Price. 

I 

Year  and  month. 

Price. 

Year  and  month 

1840  Jan . 

$0 . 090 

1847  Jan . 

$0 . 070 

1854  Jan . 

Apr . 

.090 

Apr . 

•075 

Apr . 

July  . 

.090 

July  . 

•075 

July  . 

Oct . 

.090 

.090 

Oct . 

•075 

.065 

Oct 

1841  Jan . 

1848  Jan . 

1855  Jan . 

Apr . 

.090 

Apr . 

.065 

Apr . 

July  . 

.070 

July  . 

.070 

July  . 

Oct . 

.065 

.070 

Oct . 

.070 

.070 

Oct 

1842  Jan . 

!  1849  Jan . 

1856  Jan . 

Apr . 

.070 

Apr . 

.070 

Apr . 

July  . 

.070 

July  . 

.060 

July  . 

Oct . 

.070 

.065 

Oct . 

.060 

Oct 

1843  Jan . 

1850  Jan . 

.060 

1857  Jan . 

Apr . 

.065 

Apr . 

.070 

Apr . 

July  . 

.065 

July  . 

.070 

July  . 

Oct . 

.060 

Oct . 

.065 

.050 

Oct  . . 

1844  Jan . 

.050 

1851  Jan . 

1858  Jan . 

Apr . 

.060 

Apr . 

•055. 

Apr . 

July  . 

.060 

July  . 

.050 

July  . 

Oct . 

.0S0 

.050 

Oct . 

.  060 

Oct 

1845  Jan . 

1852  Jan . 

.065 

1859  Jan . 

Apr . 

.080 

Apr . 

.080 

Apr 

July  . 

•075 

July  . 

.070 

July  . 

Oct . 

.065 

•075 

Oct . 

.070 

.085 

Oct 

1846  Jan . 

1853  Jan . 

i860  Jan . 

Apr . 

•075 

Apr . 

.080 

Apr . 

July  . 

•075 

Tuly  . 

.070 

July  . 

Oct . 

.070 

Oct . 

•095 

Oct . 

Price. 


$0. 105 
.110 
.080 
.080 
•095 
•115 
.070 
•075 
.085 
.  100 
•075 

.070 
.  100 
.130 
.085 

.075 

.065 
.080 
.060 
.070 
.  100 
.  100 
.070 
.085 
.  100 
.110 
.075 
.  100 


MISCELLANEOUS  STATISTICS 


503 


Table  82. — Prices  of  corn  per  bushel,  at  New  York,  1840  to  i860. 

[Source:  Aldrich  Report  (1893),  part  2,  p.  7.] 


Year  and  month. 

Price. 

Year  and  month. 

Price. 

Year  and  month. 

Price. 

1840  Jan . 

$0,580 

1847  Jan . 

$0.8l0 

1854  Jan . 

$0,795 

Apr . 

.565 

Apr . 

.970 

Apr . 

•750 

July  . 

•545 

July  . 

•930 

July  . 

.770 

Oct . 

.585 

.570 

•495 

Oct . 

.665 

Oct . 

•755 

1. 000 

1. 000 

1841  Jan . 

Apr . 

1848  Jan . 

Apr . 

.685 

•530 

1855  Jan . 

Apr . 

July  . 

.630 

July  . 

•530 

July  . 

•  895 

Oct . 

.710 

.665 

Oct . 

.770 

.650 

Oct . 

.860 

1842  Jan . 

1849  Jan . 

1856  Jan . 

.925 

Apr . 

••595 

Apr . 

•575 

Apr . 

.640 

July  . 

.6lO 

July  . 

.560 

July  . 

.515 

Oct . 

.585 

Oct . 

•645 

Oct . 

.685 

1843  Jan . 

•545 

1850  Jan . 

.630 

1857  Jan . 

.680 

Apr . 

.515 

Apr . 

.560 

Apr . 

.690 

July  . 

•565 

July  . 

.610 

July  . 

.845 

Oct . 

.515 

Oct . 

.655 

Oct . 

.700 

1844  Jan . 

•475 

1851  Jan . 

.660 

1858  Jan . 

.600 

Apr . 

.525 

Apr . 

.680 

Apr . 

.690 

July  . 

Oct . 

.505 

.490 

July  . 

Oct . 

.560 

.625 

July  . 

Oct . 

•  730 
•715 

1845  Jan . 

•490 

1852  Jan . 

.660 

1859  Jan . 

.790 

Apr . 

.490 

Apr . 

.670 

Apr . 

•895 

July  . 

•  475 

July  . 

.605 

July  . 

.820 

Oct . 

•  575 

Oct . 

.705 

Oct . 

.920 

1846  Jan . 

.715 

1853  Jan . 

.740 

i860  Jan . 

.890 

Apr . 

.700 

Apr . 

.640 

Apr . 

•  70S 

July  . 

•  535 

July  . 

Oct . 

.635 

.830 

July  . 

Oct . 

.630 

.690 

Table  83. — Prices  of  corn  (ear)  per  bushel,  at  Cincinnati,  1840  to  1853. 

[Source:  Aldrich  Report  (1893),  part  2,  p.  8.] 

Year  and  month. 

Price. 

Year  and  month. 

Price. 

Year  and  month. 

Price. 

1840  Jan . 

$0.31 

Apr . 

.20 

July  . 

.22 

Oct . 

•  25 

1841  Jan . 

.22 

Apr . 

.23 

July  . 

.28 

Oct . 

•  34 

1842  Jan . 

.28 

Apr . 

•  23 

July  . 

.23 

Oct . 

.21 

1843  Jan . 

.21 

1844  Jan . 

.25 

Apr . 

.29 

July  . 

.24 

Oct . 

•  32 

1845  Jan . 

$0.32 

Apr . 

•  34 

July  . 

•  34 

Oct . 

.36 

1846  Jan . 

•  34 

Apr . 

•  3i 

July  . 

.25 

Oct . 

.23 

1847  Jan . 

.21 

Apr . 

.40 

July  . 

.41 

Oct . 

•  31 

1848  Jan . 

•  31 

Apr . 

.26 

July  . 

•  30 

Oct . 

.28 

1849  Jan . 

.28 

Apr . 

.26 

1849  July  . 

$0.34 

Oct . 

•  34 

1850  Jan . 

•  3i 

Apr . 

.38 

July  . 

.48 

Oct . 

•  51 

1851  Jan . 

.38 

Apr . 

•  37 

July  . 

•37 

Oct . 

•  34 

1852  Jan . 

.28 

Apr . 

.27 

July  . 

•  32 

Oct . 

.41 

1853  Jan . 

.42 

Apr . 

.41 

July  . 

.  48 

Oct . 

•55 

504 


AGRICULTURE  IN  NORTHERN  UNITED  STATES 


Table  84. — Prices  of  hogs  ( fair  to  good  packing ,  live  weight )  per  100  pounds , 

at  Cincinnati,  1841  to  i860. 

[Source:  Aldrich  Report  (1893),  part  2,  p.  27.] 


Year  and  month. 

Price. 

Year  and  month. 

Price. 

Year  and  month. 

Price. 

1841  Jan . 

Oct . 

1842  Jan . 

1843  Jan . 

July  . 

Oct . 

1844  Jan . 

Apr . 

July  . 

1845  Jan . 

Oct . 

1846  Jan . 

July  . 

1847  Jan . 

Apr . 

Oct . 

1848  Jan . 

Apr . 

July  . 

Oct . 

1849  Jan . 

Oct . 

$3.70 

3-15 

2.00 

1- 75 
1.87 
2.50 

2- 45 
2.62 
2.50 

3-  60 
4.00 
4.15 

1.80 

3.20 

4- 50 
4.00 

2.50 
2.75 

2.00 

3.50 

3-35 

225 

1850  Jan . 

Oct . 

1851  Jan . 

Apr . 

July  . 

Oct . 

1852  Jan . 

Apr . 

July  . 

Oct . 

1853  Jan . 

Apr . 

July  . 

Oct . 

1854  Jan . 

Apr . 

July  . 

Oct . 

1855  Jan . 

Apr . 

July  . 

Oct . 

$2.90 

3-50 

4.15 

3-50 

3-50 

3- 65 
4.90 
5-oo 
5-00 
5-65 

6.25 

5-05 

4- 25 
6.00 
4.40 
4.00 
3-25 

3- 85 

4- 50 

4.25 

4-85 

6.00 

1856  Jan . 

Apr . 

July  . 

Oct . 

1857  Jan . 

Apr . 

July  . 

Oct . 

1858  Jan . 

Apr . 

July  . 

Oct . 

1859  Jan . 

Apr . 

July  . 

Oct . 

1860  Jan . 

Apr . 

July  . 

Oct . 

$5-55 

4.60 

5-25 

5-io 

6.70 

6.25 

5-90 

6.15 

4.90 

4-65 

3- 65 

4- 45 
6.25 
6.50 

5- 25 
4.60 
6.00 
5.00 
3*io 
5-75 

Table  85. — Prices  of  hogs  ( good  to  prime,  live  weight )  per  100  pounds, 

at  New  York,  1840  to  i860. 

[Source:  Aldrich  Report  (1893),  part  2,  p.  28.] 


Year  and  month. 

Price. 

Year  and  month. 

Price. 

Year  and  month. 

Price. 

1840  Jan . 

Apr . 

$4,750 

4-875 

4.625 

1847  Jan . . 

Apr . 

$5-375 

5-125 

5-375 

5-500 

5.000 

1854  Apr . 

Tulv 

$5-500 

4- 750 

5- 375 
5.125 
5-250 

5-500 

July  . 

July  . 

J  L4AJ  •••••• 

Oct . 

Oct . 

3- 375 

4- 750 

Oct . 

t8cc  Tnn 

1841  Jan . 

1848  Jan . 

J  •  •  •  •  •  • 

Apr . 

Apr . 

4.500 

Apr . 

6.000 

July  . 

July  . 

5.000 

July  . 

4-875 

Oct . 

6.750 

1842  Jan . 

4.000 

4-500 

Oct . 

4.690 

4.625 

i8=;6  Tan 

6.500 

6.875 

Apr . 

1849  Jan . 

Apr . 

July  . 

4-500 

Apr . 

5-500 

July  . 

6-375 

Oct . 

3-56o 

3- 750 

4- 750 
4.500 
4.250 

Oct . 

4-500 

4.000 

Oct 

6-375 

6.750 

7.500 

6-375 

6.875 

5-750 

1843  Jan . 

i8=;o  Tan . 

18^7  Tan 

Apr . 

July  . 

Apr . 

Oct . 

4.000 

4. 190 
4.250 
5-375 

±%J0/  Ja11 . 

Apr . 

Tulv 

1844  Jan . 

1851  Jan . 

J  . 

Oct 

Apr . 

4-750 

Apr . 

1858  Jan . 

July  . 

5.000 

Oct . 

4-875 

4.620 

A  nr 

6.250 

4.190 

Oct . 

4.000 

1852  Jan . 

July  . 

1845  Jan . 

3-625 

Apr . 

5-750 

5-750 

Oct  . 

4- 750 

5- 250 

Apr . 

4-750 

July  . 

1859  Jan . 

July  . 

4.125 

3-500 

Oct . 

5-625 

6.250 

Aor 

5-500  " 

6.000 

Oct . 

1853  Jan . 

July  . 

1846  Jan . 

4.250 

Apr . 

7.250 

S.000 

Oct  .... 

5.625 

5.625 

6.060 

6.750 

6.690 

Apr . 

5.000 

July  . 

i860  Jan  . . . 

July  . 

4-750 

4.005 

Oct . 

5-375 

5-750 

Anr 

Oct . 

1854  Jan . 

July  . 

Oct . 

MISCELLANEOUS  STATISTICS 


505 


Table  86. — Maple  sugar:  Production  in  the  United  States. 
[Source:  U.  S.  censuses,  1840,  1850  and  i860.] 


Geographic  division 
and  State. 

1840. 

1850. 

i860. 

Total 

(1000 

lbs.). 

Per 

capita 

(lbs.). 

Per 

cent. 

Total 

(1000 

lbs.). 

Per 

capita 

(lbs.). 

Per 

cent. 

Total 

(1000 

lbs.). 

Per 

capita 

(lbs.). 

Per 

cnet. 

United  States  . 

34,516 

2.0 

100.0 

34,253 

1.5 

100.0 

40,120 

1.3 

100.0 

Geographic  Division : 

New  England . 

6,699 

3-0 

I9.4 

8,588 

3-1 

25.1 

13,510 

4-3 

33.7 

Middle  Atlantic  .... 

12,314 

2.7 

35V 

12,686 

2.2 

37-0 

13,587 

1.8 

33-9 

East  North  Central. 

11,956 

4.1 

34-6 

10,809 

2.4 

31.6 

10,658 

1.5 

26.6 

West  North  Central 

316 

•  7 

•9 

260 

•3 

.8 

832 

•4 

2.1 

New  England : 

Maine  . 

258 

•5 

•7 

94 

.2 

•3 

307 

•  5 

.8 

New  Hampshire  . . . 

I,l62 

4.1 

3-4 

1,299 

4.1 

3-8 

2,255 

6.9 

5-6 

Vermont  . 

4,648 

15-9 

13-5 

6,349 

20.2 

18.5 

9,898 

31.4 

24.7 

Massachusetts  . 

579 

.8 

1-7 

795 

.8 

2.3 

1,006 

.8 

2.5 

Rhode  Island  . 

a 

a 

Connecticut  . 

52 

.2 

.  1 

51 

.  1 

.2 

44 

.  1 

.  1 

Middle  Atlantic : 

New  York  . 

10,048 

4.1 

29.1 

10,357 

3-3 

30.2 

10,816 

2.8 

27.0 

New  Jersey  . 

a 

2 

4 

Pennsylvania  . 

2,266 

1.3 

6.6 

2,327 

1.0 

6.8 

2,767 

1.0 

6.9 

East  North  Central : 

Ohio  . 

6,363 

4.2 

18.4 

4,588 

2.3 

13.4 

3,346 

1.4 

8-3 

Indiana  . 

3,728 

5-4 

10.8 

2,921 

3-o 

8.6 

1,542 

1 . 1 

3-9 

Illinois  . 

400 

•9 

1 . 1 

249 

•3 

•  7 

134 

.  1 

•  3 

Michigan  . 

1,330 

6-3 

3-9 

2,440 

6.1 

7.i 

4,052 

2.3 

10. 1 

Wisconsin  . 

135 

4.4 

•4 

611 

2.0 

1.8 

1,584 

2.0 

4.0 

West  North  Central : 

Minnesota  . 

3 

371 

2.2 

.  Q 

Iowa  . 

41 

1 .0 

.  1 

78 

•4 

•  3 

315 

•  5 

.8 

Missouri  . 

275 

•  7 

.8 

179 

•  3 

•5 

142 

.  1 

•4 

Nebraska  . 

a 

Kansas  . 

A 

*T 

a  Less  than  500  pounds. 


INDEX 


Agricultural  chemistry,  319 
education,  320 
fairs,  318 

improvement,  184,  in  the  East,  200 
machinery,  405,  effects  of,  293;  see 
also  Tools  and  Implements, 
Reaping  Machines  and  Thresh¬ 
ing  Machines 
periodicals,  469 
societies,  184-193,  317 
Agriculture  in  1840 

Eastern  and  central  New  York, 
260 

Maryland  and  Delaware,  262 
New  England,  259 
Southeastern  Pennsylvania,  261 
Western  New  York  and  eastern 
Ohio,  262 
The  West,  263 

Alfalfa,  234 

American  Husbandry,  458 
Apples,  16,  99;  see  also  Orchards 
Asparagus,  16 

Associated  dairy  system,  430 

Bank  loans,  use  of  by  farmers,  248 

Barberry  bushes,  legislation  against,  93 

Barley,  14,  97,  241,  356 

Barns,  see  Farm  Buildings 

Beans,  16 

Beatty,  Adam,  473 

Beef  cattle,  108,  264,  387-405 

in  the  Connecticut  Valley,  224 
in  the  earliest  settlements,  27 
in  Kentucky,  401 
in  Maine,  227 
in  Michigan,  393 
in  New  York,  395 
in  New  England,  396 
in  Ohio,  177,  178,  39B  401 
in  Pennsylvania,  227,  395 
in  Wisconsin,  393 
on  the  prairies,  392 
receipts  at  New  York,  399,  400 
weight,  109 

western  in  eastern  markets,  227 
Beef  production,  in  the  West,  business  organiza¬ 
tion,  391 
Bees,  32 

Berkshire  Agricultural  Society,  187 
Black-stem  rust,  13,  93,  238 
Blast  on  wheat,  see  Black-stem  rust 
Boston,  market  for  farm  products,  141 
tax  lists,  26,  28,  30,  32,  37 
Bounties,  see  State  aid  to  agriculture 
Bounty  lands,  74 
Brighton  Market,  225,  397 
Broom  corn,  245,  382 


Broom  straw,  see  Grasses,  native 
Buckwheat,  97,  241 
Buel,  Jesse,  239,  281,  316,  470,  473 
Buffalo,  grain  trade,  310 

Buffalo  grass,  and  buffalo  clover,  see  Grasses, 
native 

Business  organization  in  beef  production,  391 
Butter,  109,  228 

methods  of  production,  424-427 
production  in  New  York  State,  424 
By-industries  of  farming,  253 

Cabbages,  16 
Caird,  James,  472 
California,  migration  to,  394 
Cane,  see  Grasses,  native 
Capital,  use  in  colonial  agriculture,  115 
scarce,  on  pioneer  farms,  162 
Carrots,  16,  379 
Carts,  36 

Cattle  driving,  across  Alleghanies,  177 
from  Texas,  400 
Cattle  fattening,  see  Beef  cattle 
Cattle  shows,  187 
Cauliflower,  16 
Census  of  Agriculture,  317 
Cereals,  European,  in  earliest  settlements,  12 
Cheese,  109,  182,  228,  229 

exports  from  New  England,  109 
factories,  429 

methods  of  production,  424-427 
production  in  New  York  State,  424 
production  in  Ohio,  428 
receipts  at  Albany,  422 
Cherries,  16 

Chester  County,  Pennsylvania,  232 
Qiicago,  beef  packing,  393 
grain  trade,  310 

Cider,  consumption  in  New  England,  99 
Cincinnati,  pork  packing,  439 
Clearing,  process  of,  in  earliest  settlements,  8 
Gearings  or  openings,  6 

their  origin,  8 

Clovers,  see  Grasses,  English 

Colman,  Henry,  252,  254,  255,  465 

Colonial  agriculture,  economic  characteristics, 

H5 

Common  fields,  21,  55 

their  disadvantages,  57 
Commons,  town,  21 
stinted,  22 

Competition  of  western  wheat  in  New  England, 
237 

Connecticut  Colony,  inventory  of  estates,  10,  26, 
28,  30,  32,  35 

Connecticut,  land  utilization,  120 
Connecticut  tax  lists,  112,  120 
Connecticut  Valley,  99,  109,  224,  235,  246,  384, 
397 


507 


508  INDEX 


Corn,  89-92,  168,  240,  264,  3 11,  339-349,  390 
cultivation  by  English  settlers,  11 
cultivation  on  prairies,  345 
imported  into  New  England  from  other 
parts  of  the  Union,  240 
Indian  management  of,  10 
in  Kentucky,  342 
in  Ohio,  343 

in  New  England,  90,  340-342 
in  New  Sweden,  92 
method  of  harvesting,  342,  347 
purchased  from  Indians,  40,  41 
west  of  Ohio,  345-347 
Corn  Belt,  393,  437 
Corn  planters,  300-302,  348 
Country  Gentleman,  470 
Country  store,  133 

County  agricultural  societies,  188-193 
Cow  herd,  duties,  22 
Cow  rights,  23 
Cradle,  207 

Credit  system,  see  Land  policy,  federal 
Crop  enemies,  374 

of  wheat,  332 
Crop  management,  85 
Crop  rotation,  232,  322,  327,  350,  368,  369 
Crop  yields,  101,  170,  239,  335 
Crops  and  tillage,  232-246 

on  pioneer  farms,  168 
Crops  in  earliest  settlements,  9 
Cultivator,  470 
Cultivators,  210,  302 

Dairy  cows,  introduction  of  new  breeds,  432 
production  of  milk,  229,  431 
Dairy  products,  227 
Dairy  system,  associated,  430 
Dairying,  109,  421-434 

in  central  New  York,  422 
in  earliest  settlements,  27 
in  New  England,  421 
in  the  Hudson  and  Mohawk  valleys, 
422 

in  southeastern  Pennsylvania,  427 
in  the  Western  Reserve,  427,  429 
west  of  Ohio,  428 
westward  movement,  228 
Davy,  Sir  Humphrey,  319,  320 
Deere,  John,  283 
Delaware,  farming  in  1840,  262 
peach  orchards,  380 
Diet  of  farmers,  127 
Draft  animals,  29,  403-405 
Dufour,  John,  381 
Dwight,  Timothy,  460 

Education  of  farmers,  184-195 
Eliot,  Jared,  458 
Ellsworth,  Henry  W.,  316 
Ellsworth,  Henry  L.,  317 
Emigration,  280,  358 

from  New  England,  71 
to  the  frontier,  causes,  76 
Erie  Canal,  150,  181,  306,  308 

effects  of,  181,  237,  306 
shipments  on,  182,  183,  310,  329 


Essex  County  (Mass.),  inventory  of  estates  in, 
9,  26,  28,  30,  32,  35 
Europe,  exports  to,  134 
Expansion  on  new  land,  causes,  70 
Exports ;  see  also  Markets  for  farm  products 
inspection  of,  244 

of  agricultural  produce  from  New 
England,  43 

of  animal  products,  493,  of  wheat  and 
corn,  494 

of  horses  from  New  England,  113 
of  northern  farm  products,  136 

Fallowing,  102,  325 
Farm  buildings,  121,  271 
capital,  247 
credit,  248 
equipment,  34 
houses,  129 
wages,  204-207 
women,  work  of,  252 
Farms,  size  of,  37,  115 
Federal  aid  to  agriculture,  317,  365 
Fences,  21,  121,  271 

Fertilizers,  87,  88,  232,  234,  320,  327,  340,  343, 
348,  367,  368 ;  see  also  Soil  Amendments 
Fish,  use  as  fertilizer,  234 
Flail,  126 

Flax,  14,  98,  250,  359-363 
Flint,  Charles  L.,  469 
Flour  consumption  in  Massachusetts,  236 
receipts  at  Boston,  31 1 
shipments  on  Lake  Erie,  327 
Food,  dependence  on  natural  resources,  5 
scarcity  in  earliest  settlements,  40 
Forests,  importance  in  pioneer  farming,  158 
Fruit,  16,  99,  382 

Gardiner,  Robert  Hallowell,  194 
Genesee  Valley,  449 
Goats,  18,  32 
Goodall,  S.  L.,  469 

Grain  trade,  of  Buffalo  and  Chicago,  310 
Grain  worm,  238,  333,  357;  see  also  Wheat 
midge 

Grape  culture,  commercial ;  see  Vineyards 
Grapes,  17 
Grasses,  102 

cultivated ;  see  Grasses,  English 
English,  20,  103,  159,  161,  234,  366,  367, 

369 

native,  19,  102,  159-161,  366,  371 
Grass  land,  234,  235 
Guano,  234 
Gypsum,  232 

Harrows,  124,  210,  304 
Harvesting  of  grain,  125 
Hay,  102,  105,  366-372 

in  eastern  Pennsylvania,  369 
in  Kentucky,  369 
in  New  York,  368 
in  New  England,  369 
on  prairie  farms,  369,  371 


INDEX 


509 


Haying  machines,  297 
Headers,  291 
Hemp,  15,  100,  363-365 
Herds  grass,  104 
Herdsmen,  21 

Hessian  fly,  95,  238,  324-326 
Hogs ;  see  Swine 
Holland  Land  Company,  75 
Holmes,  Ezekiel,  469 
Home  industries,  126 

Home  lots,  see  Land  tenure  in  New  England 
Home  market,  its  significance,  197 
see  also  Markets 

Homespun  textiles,  see  Household  industries 
Hops,  243,  384 
Horse  rakes,  213,  296 
Horses,  18,  29,  in,  231,  403,  443-447 
Conestoga,  113 

exported  from  New  England,  44 
improvement  in  breed  of,  446 
Morgan  breed,  443 
Narragansett  pacers,  113 
Household  industries,  decline  of,  250-253 
Houses,  in  earliest  settlements,  6 
Hudson  Valley,  dairying,  422 

decline  of  wheat  growing,  326 
Humphrey,  Col.  David,  187,  217 
Hussey,  Obed,  213,  287 

Illinois,  horse  raising,  447 

sheep  driving  from,  419 
wheat  growing,  330 
Immigration,  205 
Imports,  animal  products,  494 
food,  40 
wheat,  498 
wool,  497 

Indians,  management  of  maize,  10 

Intervales,  234 

Iowa,  wool  growing,  420 

Jarvis,  William,  218 
Jefferson,  Thomas,  208 
Johnson,  John,  318 

Kentucky  breeding  of  mules,  447 
corn  production,  342 
farming  in  1840,  264 
hay  crops,  369 
hemp  production,  364 
native  cattle,  401 
types  of  horses,  443 

Kentucky  blue  grass,  see  Grasses,  English 
Klippart,  John  H.,  473 

Labor,  cooperative,  34,  164 

farm,  33  1 16,  163,  204-207,  274-277 
indentured  servants,  33,  117 
Indians,  33 
negro  slaves,  33,  118 
Labor-saving  machinery,  204-216 
Land  grants,  to  communities,  49 
grants,  individual,  49 
in  Pennsylvania,  72 


Land,  law  of  inheritance,  58,  66 

method  of  distribution  in  New  England, 
5.1-53 

policy,  colonial,  75 
policy,  federal,  151-155 
speculation,  72,  74,  75,  154 
surveying,  rectilinear,  52 
system,  colonial,  in  New  York,  73 
system,  colonial,  in  Pennsylvania,  72 
system,  in  Maine,  75 

system,  in  New  England,  its  significance, 

58 

tenure,  49-66 

tenure  in  the  middle  colonies,  60-66 
tenure  in  New  England,  49-59 
tenure  in  New  Netherland,  62 
tenure  in  New  York,  63 
utilization,  38,  119 
values,  70,  242,  328 
Liebig’s  mineral  theory,  319 
Lime,  use  of,  88 
Linen,  15 

Livestock,  217-231 

brands,  23 

control  of  breeding,  23 
earliest  importations,  18 
earmarks,  23 

in  earliest  settlements,  26 
management,  21,  107,  166 
number  and  kinds  on  farms,  105 
shelter,  25,  107 
winter  feed,  25,  107 
Livingston,  Robert,  186,  187,  217,  465 
Long  Island  towns,  tax  lists,  26,  28,  30,  32,  37 
Longworth,  Nicholas,  381,  449 
Lucerne,  234 

Machinery,  agricultural,  281-305  . 

Maine,  beef  production,  227 
wild  lands,  75 
Maize,  see  Corn 
Manufactures,  132 

relation  to  agriculture,  198 
Maple  sugar,  80 

production  in  the  United  States, 
505 

Market  gardening,  242 

information  service,  226 
milk,  22 8,  429 

Marketing,  cooperative,  249 

methods,  174,  178,  225,  244,  249,  397, 

430 

Markets  and  fairs,  46 

Markets,  for  farm  products,  132,  164,  169,  242 
domestic,  45-48,  137-142,  1 7L  1 77,  182, 
197-203,  226,  230,  306-311 
for  beef  cattle,  391-394,  403 
for  butter  and  cheese,  427 
for  eggs,  442 
for  flax,  361,  413 
for  hay,  235,  368-371 
for  horses,  446,  447 
for  milk,  429 
for  oxen,  396 
for  potatoes,  374 


510 


INDEX 


Markets,  for  western  farm  products,  in  the 
East,  171,  31 1,  in  the  South,  172,  308 
foreign,  133-135,  196,  312,  442 
in  the  West  Indies,  42-45,  135 
influence  on  farming,  202 

Marl,  233 
Marsh,  C.  W.,  472 
Martha’s  Vineyard,  no 
Maryland,  farming  in  1840,  262 
peach  orchards,  380 
Massachusetts,  farm  wages,  206 

land  utilization,  119 

Massachusetts  Society  for  Promoting  Agricul¬ 
ture,  185 

Massachusetts  Valuation  Returns,  105,  112,  119 
McCormick,  Cyrus  H.,  213,  287 
Meadows,  irrigated,  103 
permanent,  234 
Meat  packing  at  Chicago,  393 
Meslin,  14 

Miami  Valley,  corn  production,  342 

Michigan,  beef  cattle,  393 

Middle  colonies,  cultivation  of  wheat,  93 

land  tenure,  60-66 
trade,  45 

Milk,  marketing  of,  429 

Mississippi  River,  shipments  of  western  pro¬ 
duce,  309 

Missouri,  breeding  of  mules,  447 
farming  in  1840,  264 
Missouri  Valley,  vineyards,  381 
Mitchell,  Dr.  John,  459 
Mohawk  Valley,  dairying,  422 

decline  of  wheat  growing,  ^26 

Mortgages,  248 

Moms  Multicaulis,  382 

Mowing  machines,  212,  294-296,  372 

Mules,  1 13,  447 

Mutton,  no 

Narragansett  Country,  109,  116 
Natural  clearings,  157 
Neat  cattle,  18,  167.  See  also  Beef  Cattle 
colonial,  their  ancestry,  24 
Devons,  24,  402 

driving  to  eastern  markets  from 
Ohio,  390 
Danish,  24 
Dutch,  24 

improved  breeds  from  England, 
179,  223,  401-403 
native  breed,  224,  401 
Shorthorns,  402,  403 
Spanish,  24 
weight  of,  403 
winter  feeding,  392 
Newbold,  Charles,  208 
New  England,  cattle  feeding,  396,  399 
corn  production,  340 
cultivation  of  maize,  90 
dairy  industry,  421 
dependence  on  southern  and 
middle  colonies,  142 
effects  of  western  competition, 
237 


New  England,  exports,  43 

farming  in  1840,  259 
hay  crops,  369 

improvement  of  agriculture,  202 
land  policy,  71 
land  system,  49-60 
legislation  against  barberries,  93 
markets  for  potatoes,  374 
oat  crops,  350 
tobacco  production,  382 
trade  of  ports  with  back  coun¬ 
try,  140 

types  of  horses,  443 
use  of  slaves  for  farm  labor, 
118 

village  community,  58 
wheat  crops,  92,  236,  322 
wheat  growing,  333 
wool  growing,  408 

New  Haven  Colony,  inventory  of  estates,  26,  28, 
30,  32 

New  Jersey,  land  distribution,  60 

New  Netherlands,  land  tenure,  62 

New  Orleans,  market  for  western  products, 

173,  175 

receipts  of  produce,  309 
New  Sweden,  cultivation  of  maize,  92 
New  York,  cattle  feeding  in  southern  and  east¬ 
ern  counties,  395 
dairying,  228,  422 

eastern  and  central,  farming  in 
1840,  260 
hay  crops,  368 
land  policy,  73 
land  speculation,  74 
land  tenure,  62 

market  for  farm  products,  89 

oat  crops,  350 

tobacco  production,  382 

trade  with  back  country,  139 

wheat  crops,  325 

wheat  growing,  333 

wool  growing,  408 

New  York  Society  for  the  Promotion  of  the 
Useful  Arts,  186 


Oak  openings,  267 
Oats,  14,  97,  241,  350 
Ohio,  corn  production,  344 

eastern,  cattle  grazing,  178 
native  cattle,  401 
northern,  grazing,  391 
sheep  driving,  414 
types  of  horses,  443 
wheat  crops,  327,  335 

Ohio  Valley,  agricultural  development,  156 
physical  features,  156 
vineyards,  381 

Onions,  16,  99 
Orchard  grass,  234 
Orchards,  ico,  243,  380 
Organization  of  farmers,  184-193 
Oxen,  30,  108,  hi,  210,  231,  396,  403 


INDEX 


511 


Pasturage,  102,  234 

in  common,  21 
Pasture  lands,  368 
Pears,  16 
Peas,  99 

Pennsylvania,  barns  of  German  settlers,  122 

cattle  fattening  in  Chester 
County,  227,  395 
dairying,  427 
eastern,  hay  crops,  369 
farm  wages,  205 
land  distribution,  60 
land  policy,  72 

southeastern,  farming  in  1840, 
261 

Tax  Lists,  106 
wheat  crops,  327 
wool  growing,  412 
Periodicals,  agricultural,  193,  316 
Peters,  Richard,  186 

Philadelphia,  trade  with  back  country,  138 
Philadelphia  Society  for  Promoting  Agricul¬ 
ture,  184 

Pioneer  farming,  265 

by-industries,  79 
crops  and  tillage,  78 
economic  conditions,  162 
general  description,  76 
hardships,  81 

in  the  eighteenth  century,  69- 

.  83 

livestock,  hay  and  pasturage, 
79 

methods  of  clearing,  77 
on  the  prairies,  267-273 
a  process  of  capital  making, 
62 

transition  to  settled  farming, 

165 

west  of  the  Alleghanies,  147- 
161 

Pioneers,  characteristics  of,  156 
Plaster  of  Paris,  232 
Plows* 35,  123,  208-210,  282-286,  303 
Plums,  16 

Population,  urban,  199,  499 
Pork,  see  Swine 

Pork  packing  at  Cincinnati,  437,  439 
Potash,  process  of  manufacture,  80 
Potato  disease,  374-376 
Potato  starch,  374,  376,  378 
Potatoes,  16,  97,  241,  373-379 

introduction  into  New  England,  16 
use  as  food,  98 
Poudrette,  234 
Poultry,  32,  442 
Prairie  Farmer,  470 

Prairie  farming  vs.  woodland  farming,  158 
Prairies,  157 

their  influence  on  agricultural  prog¬ 
ress,  2  66 
Preemption,  74,  154 
Prices,  beeves,  315,  501 
butter,  315,  502 
cattle,  227 
cheese,  315,  502 


Prices,  corn,  314,  503 

farm  products,  175,  191,  312,  493 
flax  straw,  363 
flour,  237,  497 
general,  191,  493 
hay,  236 
hogs,  314,  504 
hops,  498 
implements,  281 
potatoes,  378 
wheat,  293,  313,  500 
wool,  219,  221,  495 
Pumpkins,  16 

Quinces,  16 

Railroads,  270,  276,  306,  307 

effect  on  agriculture,  398-400,  413, 
442 

Randall,  Henry  S.,  469 

Reaping  machines,  281,  287-294,  337 

Red  top,  235 

Renick,  Felix,  401 

Root  crops,  241,  373-379 

Rust,  black-stem,  13,  93,  238 

Ruta-bagas,  379 

Rye,  14,  96,  240,  353-356 

Scioto  Valley,  177,  342,  390,  399 
Scythe,  125 
Seed  drills,  299 

Self-sufficient  farming,  on  colonial  farms,  126- 

131 

decline  in  New  En¬ 
gland,  247 

on  pioneer  farms,  164 
Sheep,  18,  28,  no,  406-421 

driving  to  Chicago,  414 
driving  from  Illinois  to  Texas,  419 
importation  from  England,  in 
management  in  the  East,  416;  in  the 
West,  417 

Merino,  187,  217-220,  410,  412,  415 

Mutton  breeds,  410 

in  New  England  and  New  York,  408 

in  Pennsylvania,  412 

on  the  prairies,  413 

New  Leicester,  220 

Saxony,  220,  410,  412 

weight  of  fleeces,  418 

Shorthorns,  see  Neat  cattle,  importation  of  im¬ 
proved  breeds  from  England 
Sickle,  125 
Silk,  101,  193,  382 
Size  of  farms,  449 
Skinner,  John  T.,  316 
Slaves,  see  Labor 
Sorghum,  382 
Soil  amendments,  87-89 

depletion  in  New  York  State,  335 
exploitation,  272 
fertility,  conservation,  232 
Spelt,  96 
Squashes,  16 


INDEX 


512 

Squatters,  in  New  York,  73 

in  Pennsylvania,  72 
State  aid  to  agriculture,  189,  193,  324 
State  boards  of  agriculture,  318,  468 
Sugar  beets,  379,  382 
Sulphate  of  lime,  232 
Swine,  18,  31,  in,  167,  435-441 
average  weight,  in,  441 
imports  of  improved  breeds,  229 
improvement  in  breeds,  440 
in  the  East,  435,  437 
in  the  West,  437-441 
native  type,  441 

Teasels,  246 

Tenant  farming,  73,  242,  449 
Texas,  cattle  driving  from,  400 
Threshing  machines,  215,  281,  292,  297-299,  337 
Tile  drainage,  318 
Timothy,  see  Grasses,  English 
Tobacco,  15,  98,  182,  246,  382 
Tools  and  implements,  34,  123,  207-216;  see 
also  Agricultural  Machinery,  Reaping  ma¬ 
chines  and  Threshing  machines 
Town  bull,  23 
Town  commons,  21 

Trade,  agricultural,  40-45,  142;  see  also  Markets 
Transportation,  cost,  181,  440 
of  hay,  371 
overland,  180 

see  also  Railroads  and  Erie 
Canal 

Tucker,  Luther,  316,  470 
Tull,  Jethro,  337 
Turnips,  16,  241,  379 

U.  S.  Patent  Office  Annual  Reports,  317,  468 


Vegetables,  16,  99;  see  also  those  specifically 
mentioned 

Village  community,  in  New  England,  58 
Vineyards,  243,  381 

Wabash  Valley,  179 
Wages,  of  farm  labor,  117,  274,  277,  495 
Warren,  General  James,  186 
Watson,  Elkanah,  187 
West,  settlement  of,  69 
Western  competition,  230 
West  Indies,  exports  to,  42,  135 
Western  farming  in  1840,  263 
Western  New  York,  products  marketed,  171 
Western  Reserve,  cheese  production,  427,  429 
Westward  movement  of  population,  147-151, 
269,  277,  448 

Wheat,  12,  169,  236,  255,  307,  310,  31 1,  321-338 
crop  enemies,  238 
drills,  337 

dependence  of  New  England  on  Middle 
and  Southern  Colonies,  236 
in  the  Middle  Colonies,  93 
in  New  England,  92,  322-325 
in  New  York,  325-327 
in  Ohio,  327-329 
in  Pennsylvania,  327 
seed  selection,  95 

shipments  on  the  Great  Lakes,  307 
tillage,  96 

varieties,  95,.  239,  330 
west  of  Ohio,  329-332 
Wheat  midge,  326 
Wild  rye,  see  Grasses,  native 
Wisconsin,  beef  cattle,  393 

wheat  growing,  330 
Wood,  Jethro,  209 
Wool,  no,  217-223;  see  also  Sheep 
in  the  West,  183 
imports,  221 


UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS-URBANA 

630.973B47H  C004 

HISTORY  OF  AGRICULTURE  IN  THE  NORTHERN  U 


3  0112  020353345 


